 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by J_Posse |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Really? So, is the Undertaker, especially since losing the "streak," weasling his way into take that "spot" annually too?
I could see if Triple H couldn't still go in the ring, but overall he's done a good job of adapting to his body slowing down and still performing well. His match against Roman did stink last year, although that was more because poor building, people "hating" Roman and their styles being too similar IMO.
I'd give one of the best workers, most dedicated and loyal WWE guys another year or two before I'd totally write him off. Although, if you or anyone else is a (second name we can't say) fan then I understand the animosity, TBH.
Sent from my SM-G925V using Operation Sports mobile app
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Well, Taker should not wrestle another match, and he has definitely been pushing things in recent years, but he will always get more leeway from me because he's on a completely different level than Triple H, legacy wise. Especially at that event.
Another big difference: Taker used to drop in and have memorable matches, Triple H drops in and has competent but forgettable ones. And that's my main issue with Triple H. He gets way more credit as a "legend" than he deserves.