|
Which is what WWE has done. When has Triple H ever been the #1 guy in WWE?
99-2001: Rock and Austin were the top guys. Triple H was the #1 foil though.
Early 2002: Triple H was the top guy because he was white hot on his return, but Rock returning and the return of Hogan took over.
mid 2002- late 2003: Triple H was the top guy when he returned, but he soon turned heel and Brock/Angle were the top guys for the bulk of this period once Rock/Hogan left again.
2004: Guerrero/Benoit were "the man". HHH then was built up to help make Batista once WWE found out Orton wasn't ready to be the top guy.
2005-2010: Cena/Batista took the torch. Hell, HHH was usually on the undercard with DX or feuding with Sheamus or Jeff Hardy.
2011-now: Cena/Punk are the top guys.
I don't think Triple H ever was "shoved down our throats" as the top guy. He was always pushed a damn good wrestler, but only was the #1 face for the first half of 2002. Other than that he was pushed as the #1 heel who needed help from stables, weapons, etc. He was to be taken seriously, but he wasn't the unstoppable god of wrestling. He has helped make Benoit, Sheamus, Batista, Cena, Hardy, etc. all long-term top guys. Besides Flair, what main event guy has helped make as many guys as HHH?
Is WWE really all that wrong for trusting Triple H to steady the ship when Austin got hurt, Rock went to Hollywood, the brand split started and SmackDown! had the bulk of the stars, Brock left, Orton showed what an immature dickback he was, and to help SmackDown! when RAW boned them in the draft and needed to make new stars? Booker T at WMXIX is the only questionable decision during "HHH-palooza" and I don't think that was HHH's call. RVD was hot, but you don't put the belt on a guy who shits on the company and openly breaks the law. Steiner and Nash weren't going to get the belt, but they needed to be established as big deals in the WWE. HHH/Goldberg was a big deal and made Goldberg look like a fucking beast despite him being a horrible 1 trick pony.
|