Paid Members tiger_rick Posted February 17, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 17, 2014 I would have gone with Triple H vs. The Rock one on one and had Trips leave with the title due to a screwy finish leading to Backlash. The other two guys didn't add anything. I don't think that's true -- they enabled the "McMahon in every corner" gimmick, which we can see as meaningless, but I'd be surprised if that didn't add to the buyrate. The McMahon family were far from done back then. And it got Foley back for a WrestleMania main event, which damaged his stock and credibility long-term, but I'd be surprised if that didn't add loads of buys too because Mick Foley was a hotter property in early 2000 than pretty much anyone besides Hogan/Rock/Austin/Cena has ever been. And it protected a Rock-HHH singles to be a big draw the next month. You're possibly right but I really don't see how a well booked Triple H vs. The Rock match given Trips prior dominance wouldn't have drawn as well. They could still have involved the McMahon's if they absolutely had too. Â I don't doubt that Foley added to the thing because what he was added to was shit. I'm not convinced that he makes a difference if the thing is done right in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Austin vs Big Show at WrestleMania 2000 was dead well before Austin got injured, I think. Big Show was fucked when he lost to Austin about two weeks after debuting, and I think any hope of him being a big-time Stone Cold opponent evaporated completely as he turned thirty times by SummerSlam and was rarely anything other than crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted February 17, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 17, 2014 EDIT: Wrong fucking thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-Rock Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 Thanks for that answer makes sense when you think about, I forget that WrestleMania is planned well in advance and because of those good few years, WWE could afford to bigger with WrestleMania 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonworden Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Great thread actually as I was wondering the other day why Wrestlemania 99 and 00 seemed so much less of a deal in some aspects than other years. I know we had bad manias before IX and 13 come to mind. but 99 and 00 just seemed to be like every other PPV. I guess its right about the venue booking situation and if it was announced its not like you could just upgrade. Surely though they could have taken the punt on 00 by March 1999. As far as I know 2005 and 2006 were either because the business had started to slide post attitude pre Cena and it was a play it safe but also because in 2005 they wanted to do LA for all the celebrity support and there's no major stadiums suitable (I guess the olympic stadium that was almost used for 7 was too big and old) The same is what they say for 22. Im mixed on the Arenas sometimes I love them and they have a great crowed and other times it just feels vacant. Who knows what 30 will feel like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-Rock Posted February 18, 2014 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 Great thread actually as I was wondering the other day why Wrestlemania 99 and 00 seemed so much less of a deal in some aspects than other years. I know we had bad manias before IX and 13 come to mind. but 99 and 00 just seemed to be like every other PPV. I guess its right about the venue booking situation and if it was announced its not like you could just upgrade. Surely though they could have taken the punt on 00 by March 1999. As far as I know 2005 and 2006 were either because the business had started to slide post attitude pre Cena and it was a play it safe but also because in 2005 they wanted to do LA for all the celebrity support and there's no major stadiums suitable (I guess the olympic stadium that was almost used for 7 was too big and old) The same is what they say for 22. Im mixed on the Arenas sometimes I love them and they have a great crowed and other times it just feels vacant. Who knows what 30 will feel like  I prefer WrestleMania to be in a stadium rather than an arena, it gives it a bigger feel and you really get a sense of how big it feels when WWE show footage of the crowd from above looking down on the stadium, one of the highlights of WrestleMania for me is to see how they have designed the stage/entrance, some years its not so great other years it they have been excellent. I miss in general WWE having interesting and varrying stages/entrances, it give each PPV a unique feel i.e. Backlash with the swinging arms and King of the Ring with the giant electric/chair.  Back on topic WrestleMania 8 was a world away in regards to size and feel in comparison to the previous WrestleMania 7, which in some ways didn't feel like a WrestleMania at all. WrestleMania 8 looked and felt like a WrestleMania should. I was suprised to learn that WrestleMania 19 was in the same venue as WrestleMania 6? is that right because I know it was quiet a few years after but it looks a totally different place, for the record WrestleMania 19 has to be one of my favourites in regards to how the stadium looked and felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 18 was the same venue as 6. But you're right, 19 had an amazing set, probably the best ever stage, just narrowing out WM24. The configuration of the stadium played a large part in that.   Still, WM8 has a special place in my heart   That said, I don't think WM *HAS* to be in an arena to feel special. Wrestlemania 9 was in a glorified carpark but it felt different to the usual TV shows. I think more events should be filmed outside every now and then, it looks great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 I'd say 8 had the best set. All that neon and blue sky just puts me back to that period when all our heads were leaking with brain fluid over how amazing this wrestling was. Back then I'd like someone based on the colour of their outfits. Crush was a particular favourite, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 I don't really know why, but I do love rebooking WrestleManias. I mentioned in Ricks 1992 Awards thread how the WrestleMania of 2000 is one of the least fondly remembered, but had that years Backlash been WrestleMania it would probably be remembered as the greatest WrestleMania ever and with the best ending. Had that been the case I think the parallels of the finishes to 16 and 17 would have been quite nifty. Â My rebooked WrestleMania 16 would probably have been fairly similar to Ricks. The Hardcore title match, Tag title Ladder and Eurocontinental double triple threat should definitely stay. Big Show really had no place being in the WrestleMania main event at that point. It should have been The Rock all the way. I understand adding some drama to his title shot between Rumble and 'Mania but Rock was the guy then, ridiculously over. It should have just been him going to 'Mania simple as. I think you still could have had The Rock vs Triple H as the main event, with the Vince turn and had the rematch the next month with the added Stone Cold element and it would have gone just fine. Triple H vs The Rock was good enough to headline multiple back to back PPVs as it was with added tweaks each time, it definitely should have headlined WrestleMania. I'd have probably created something with Big Show, Kane and X-Pac being in the final four of the Rumble and created a triple threat situation or even thrown Rikishi in and had that be a fatal 4-way. And then a tag team turmoil match for the #1 contenders to the Tag titles with DX, Too Cool, The Radicalz, T and A etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 20 had a superb set, probably my favourite. As it wasn't a stadium it wasn't the biggest set they'd done, but it was still bigger than anything imaginable for the Garden. Having the New York skyline as the titantron was great in itself- but when it changed for Kane's entrance- well that was spectacular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 Wrestlemania sets probably deserves a thread of its own if there's enough interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 I loved the WrestleMania 8 layout too. That really made it seem massive for the time. Big fan of WrestleMania 27 also, I thought that looked gorgeous. WM 24 was a great one though and one that really added to the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 Strange how certain things trigger off weird memories/associations. Whenever I see that Wrestlemania 8 set I think of El Matador and Reba McEntire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClassicsGuy Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 Does anybody know what happened within that year in order for WrestleMania 17 to be much bigger than in previous years. And what other WrestleMania's changed for the bigger better in a year (if that makes sense) Â The year 2000 was the biggest and most lucrative financial year in WWF history, which obviously led to Wrestlemania 17 being huge and held in a stadium. It was the peak of the Monday Night Wars wrestling boom. Â Although Wrestlemanias 18 & 19 were held in stadiums, the tv ratings & house show business had already started to greatly drop due to no WCW, and then after WM20 was held in MSG, Wrestlemanias 21 and 22 were held in arenas, because WWE business had declined. Things rebounded when John Cena was annointed as the face of the company and because a major draw, and thus WWE moved Wrestlemanias back to stadiums with 23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted February 18, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted February 18, 2014 Same here. That and Sid Justice with *cough* shaving foam on his face. Â Â The Wrestlemania 10 word association for me is this, not Bret/Owen or the Ladder match. I must have been a strange kid. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.