Jump to content

Best Feud of 2009


tiger_rick
 Share

Best Feud of 2009?  

128 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Jericho/Mysterio - Consistently good matches, built around a strong pro wrestling storyline (Jericho's obsession with Mysterio's mask) that was one of those rare cases where the PPVs matches kept getting actively better culminating in a legitimate MOTYC at The Bash. It is also the only one of those feuds that really played out in different match types (Elimination Chamber, singles, tag) throughout the whole year without ever getting boring - I was more excited going into their match at The Bash than I was their match at Judgement Day. Their Beat The Clock Match from last week's SmackDown! was the best match I've seen so far in 2010 as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Punk/Hardy, the obvious and correct choice. :thumbsup:

 

Solidified CM Punk as a main-eventer and that suits me just fine. Did the other feuds deliver anything like this one? I don't think so.

 

This.

 

I would have voted for the Michaels-'Taker feud if it had involved a series of matches, as everything they did was top-notch. However, it just didn't go on for long enough, and one match does not a great feud make, I'm afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I would have voted for the Michaels-'Taker feud if it had involved a series of matches, as everything they did was top-notch. However, it just didn't go on for long enough, and one match does not a great feud make, I'm afraid.

 

That's just not true. Most of the best feuds of the 80s were only one match, you can't just discount them. And even some of the best ones of recent years were only one match - Triple H/Batista, Triple H/Cena, Cena/JBL, Rock/Austin (in each stretch at a time), Angle/Lesnar as well - all these had just one big match after a load of build-up through angles, segments and promos.

 

If you want to go back further, there's pretty much all of Hogan's big feuds, same with most of the big names in the WWF at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have voted for the Michaels-'Taker feud if it had involved a series of matches, as everything they did was top-notch. However, it just didn't go on for long enough, and one match does not a great feud make, I'm afraid.

 

That's just not true. Most of the best feuds of the 80s were only one match, you can't just discount them. And even some of the best ones of recent years were only one match - Triple H/Batista, Triple H/Cena, Cena/JBL, Rock/Austin (in each stretch at a time), Angle/Lesnar as well - all these had just one big match after a load of build-up through angles, segments and promos.

 

If you want to go back further, there's pretty much all of Hogan's big feuds, same with most of the big names in the WWF at the time.

 

Right, you.

 

The feuds of the eighties were stretched over a much longer period than the two month Michaels-'Taker conflict. Most of them were built on strong angles and months of build-up prior to the match.

 

Of the feuds you reference, but one of them lasted but one match. The HHH-Batista feud culminated at Vengeance 2005 after matches at Wrestlemania and Backlash. Rock-Austin (1999) featured matches at Wrestlemania and Backlash, Cena-JBL featured matches at Wrestlemania and Judgment Day (feuding on TV for the two months in-between) and Rock-Austin 2 subtly started in December 2000 and carried on through to the post-Mania Raw, during the course of which they had collided at Armageddon and Royal Rumble before the two singles matches (Wrestlemania and the following night's RAW).

Edited by L_E_T_H_A_L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I would have voted for the Michaels-'Taker feud if it had involved a series of matches, as everything they did was top-notch. However, it just didn't go on for long enough, and one match does not a great feud make, I'm afraid.

 

That's just not true. Most of the best feuds of the 80s were only one match, you can't just discount them. And even some of the best ones of recent years were only one match - Triple H/Batista, Triple H/Cena, Cena/JBL, Rock/Austin (in each stretch at a time), Angle/Lesnar as well - all these had just one big match after a load of build-up through angles, segments and promos.

 

If you want to go back further, there's pretty much all of Hogan's big feuds, same with most of the big names in the WWF at the time.

 

You are sorta right. But, odd examples there, all of them except for Triple H - Cena featured a series of matches you spleg.

 

Or y'know, what Lethal Bizzle said.

Edited by purplemonkeydishwasher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
I would have voted for the Michaels-'Taker feud if it had involved a series of matches, as everything they did was top-notch. However, it just didn't go on for long enough, and one match does not a great feud make, I'm afraid.

 

That's just not true. Most of the best feuds of the 80s were only one match, you can't just discount them. And even some of the best ones of recent years were only one match - Triple H/Batista, Triple H/Cena, Cena/JBL, Rock/Austin (in each stretch at a time), Angle/Lesnar as well - all these had just one big match after a load of build-up through angles, segments and promos.

 

If you want to go back further, there's pretty much all of Hogan's big feuds, same with most of the big names in the WWF at the time.

 

Right, you.

 

The feuds of the eighties were stretched over a much longer period than the two month Michaels-'Taker conflict. Most of them were built on strong angles and months of build-up prior to the match.

 

Yes, but that's my point. If you were going for turn of phrase, fine, but it's not what you said.

 

Of the feuds you reference, not one of them lasted but one match. The HHH-Batista feud culminated at Vengeance 2005 after matches at Wrestlemania and Backlash. Rock-Austin (1999) featured matches at Wrestlemania and Backlash, Cena-JBL featured matches at Wrestlemania and Judgment Day (feuding on TV for the two months in-between) and Rock-Austin 2 subtly started in December 2000 and carried on through to the post-Mania Raw, during the course of which they had collided at Armageddon and Royal Rumble before the two singles matches (Wrestlemania and the following night's RAW).

 

Triple H/Batista did have matches after WM, but THE big match was at WM, and if they hadn't had the last two matches, just that match alone would've made the feud. Cena/JBL and Rock/Austin, I'll give you those. But how about Triple H/Cena and Angle/Lesnar? Even if you accept just one of those as good examples, you accept that sometimes a good-to-great feud CAN be made by one match, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Triple H/Batista did have matches after WM, but THE big match was at WM, and if they hadn't had the last two matches, just that match alone would've made the feud.

 

I strongly disagree with this. Given, it was an excellent build-up in the months prior to WrestleMania, but it was the post-'Mania momentum that made the feud a great one - and the final match at Vengeance is still, in my opinion, the highlight of Batista's career.

 

Cena/JBL and Rock/Austin, I'll give you those. But how about Triple H/Cena and Angle/Lesnar? Even if you accept just one of those as good examples, you accept that sometimes a good-to-great feud CAN be made by one match, no?

 

Triple H/Cena was such a God-awful feud that I'm glad it lasted only one match. The build-up was awful, with HHH belittling Cena on television and making it sound like it was going to be the biggest squash in WWE history. I'm sure you remember the famous line: "Do you really think I'm going to lose the title to a guy whose biggest move is pumping up his Reeboks?"

 

I wouldn't say Angle-Lesnar was a particularly 'great' feud either, but it was certainly decent due to having a much longer period than two months to build upon. I'd classify it in the same way I would HBK-'Taker - if the feud had extended into a series of matches, it may have been a classic encounter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Hmmm, you're a hard man to please. We'll have to disagree on Batista/Trips, then.

 

What about Y2J/Michaels? Their second match after WM19 wasn't really so much part of the feud as it was a facilitator for Jericho's next one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, you're a hard man to please. We'll have to disagree on Batista/Trips, then.

 

What about Y2J/Michaels? Their second match after WM19 wasn't really so much part of the feud as it was a facilitator for Jericho's next one.

 

I would certainly class their feud in 2008 as one of my all-time favourites. Everything they did was absolutely perfect from the Jeri-tron incident post-Backlash up until their classic ladder match at No Mercy and everything in-between. One of the highlights of BOTH men's careers - and that's a strong statement when Michaels is involved.

 

Like Michaels-'Taker from this year, Jericho-HBK in 2003 was a one-match feud (and like Taker-'Michaels, that one match was a classic) that would have been great if it had been extended further.

 

The eighties feuds involving Hogan were given added momentum from collisions with his opponents in SummerSlam, Survivor Series and Royal Rumble matches before the sole singles match at 'Mania. So they can't really be taken into contention, with the exception of Hogan-Warrior - and you know what I'm going to say about that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Hmmm, you're a hard man to please. We'll have to disagree on Batista/Trips, then.

 

What about Y2J/Michaels? Their second match after WM19 wasn't really so much part of the feud as it was a facilitator for Jericho's next one.

 

I would certainly class their feud in 2008 as one of my all-time favourites. Everything they did was absolutely perfect from the Jeri-tron incident post-Backlash up until their classic ladder match at No Mercy and everything in-between. One of the highlights of BOTH men's careers - and that's a strong statement when Michaels is involved.

 

Like Michaels-'Taker from this year, Jericho-HBK in 2003 was a one-match feud (and like Taker-'Michaels, that one match was a classic) that would have been great if it had been extended further.

 

OK. Fair enough. I'm sure I'll think of some later.

 

The eighties feuds involving Hogan were given added momentum from collisions with his opponents in SummerSlam, Survivor Series and Royal Rumble matches before the sole singles match at 'Mania. So they can't really be taken into contention, with the exception of Hogan-Warrior - and you know what I'm going to say about that...

 

What do you mean by "collisions"? You mean tag matches and suchlike? Because I'm pretty sure his feud with Earthquake didn't feature that, or his feud with Andr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The eighties feuds involving Hogan were given added momentum from collisions with his opponents in SummerSlam, Survivor Series and Royal Rumble matches before the sole singles match at 'Mania. So they can't really be taken into contention, with the exception of Hogan-Warrior - and you know what I'm going to say about that...

 

What do you mean by "collisions"? You mean tag matches and suchlike? Because I'm pretty sure his feud with Earthquake didn't feature that, or his feud with Andr

Edited by L_E_T_H_A_L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...