The End of an Era

[RavensEdge]

Triple H pointed it out this week and he's almost certainly correct. He, HBK(although he's retired), and Taker are the only remaining superstars from a different time, the attitude era.

Now they may be the biggest stars left but that's obviously not a true statement.Let me know if I've overlooked anyone but Kane, Christian, Mark Henry, and Goldust were all part of the different time HHH was referring to.

Is it possible that some other attitude era guys who are still around might get involved or get offended and call HHH out on it?

 

[Champ1432]

I don't see anyone else getting involved in the storyline. You are correct that the guys you mentioned are left over from the AE, but I seriously doubt they will insert any of them into the storyline or the match.

It's going to be HHH/HBK/Taker building the match up and that's it. None of the others are as big a star as those three, and it would just muddy the waters to throw any of them in there.

HHH just said that to illustrate the point that that era is over, but it's his job to keep alive the legend of the Taker and the money which that generates for WWE. Hence, his reluctance to fight Taker again.

 

[#BestInTheWorld]

Triple H pointed it out this week and he's almost certainly correct. He, HBK(although he's retired), and Taker are the only remaining superstars from a different time, the attitude era.

Now they may be the biggest stars left but that's obviously not a true statement.Let me know if I've overlooked anyone but Kane, Christian, Mark Henry, and Goldust were all part of the different time HHH was referring to.

Is it possible that some other attitude era guys who are still around might get involved or get offended and call HHH out on it?

I don't think that sort of thing would happen, as cool as it'd be to see more of the AE back...

You're right in saying that 'They were the biggest stars left' because they are, aside from The Rock of course. The rest you mentioned are not quite up to the main event level that HHH, HBK and The Taker were and still are, Christian was a top tag team champ, Kane never really took off in the way some of the others did, Henry was going nowhere with his Sexual Chocolate gimmick, and goldust, while original, wasn't on the same level that the top 3 were on.

 

[bk555]

I think Triple H is referring to one of either two things.

Either he is referring to the middle 1990's rather than the late 1990's since HHH, HBK, and Taker are all indeed the last stars in the business that were DEVELOPED at that time.

Or, Triple H means the last of the attitude era that were recognized superstars. No knock on guys like Christian, Kane, and Henry but they just werent big stars back then. They were over sure (except Henry) but they werent on the level of Taker and his streak, Triple H and his title reigns, or HBK and his legendary wrestlemania moments.

So to answer your question no, i dont think the attitude stars will get offended by this because if I understood what Triple H was referring to on Raw, they will most certainly get it.

 

[AwesomeRko]

Would love to see it happen and it could really help cement a HHH heel turn which imo opinion needs to happen if hes to play the authority figure, his McMahon-Helmsley regime persona would work and he is waaay better as a heel anyway. But I severely doubt anytying will materialise a HHH vs face Christian fued would be pretty cool though.

 

[mral82]

For all you idiots the Attitude Era was the WWF, WCW, and ECW Wars that was goin on during that period and it doesn't belong to any one promotion.
Here's a list of the current Attitude Era (WWF, WCW, ECW) guys that are w/ the WWE right now:
Chris Jericho
Kane
R-Truth
Rey Mysterio, Jr.
Triple H
The Big Show
Christian
Mick Foley (when Active)
Mark Henry
The Undetaker
Dustin Rhodes aka Goldust
Booker T
William Regal
Jerry Lawler
These are the final members of that era that is still around. So once these guys retired from the WWE it will be the end of that ERA.

 

[OneTooManyPunts]

I don't think so. If you look around the roster, what Triple H said was, in large part true. HHH, HBK and Undertaker are the last bastions of the Attitude Era in the WWE. Yes, you get the occasional appearances from The Rock (albeit a huge one in his case), Stone Cold, and Mick Foley, but that generation of wrestlers is essentially no longer at the forefront of the WWE conscious.

Yes, Mark Henry and Goldust were both present during that time frame, but neither is really someone you would think of when you think of the Attitude Era.

Triple H's speech on Raw was really just a way of trying to craft a storyline. In the same vain as Undertaker being 'The Last Outlaw' around WM last year. Given that neither Triple H or Undertaker have had any real interaction in a year..there aren't a lot of avenue for WWE to build off of. The inclusion of Triple H's speech helped paint the picture of importance in both their storied runs in the company, as well as to highlight the fact that Triple H is moving in to an executive role both on screen and in reality.

I don't see any other Attitude Era stars really getting too involved in this storyline from this point on. Goldust is campaigning for a match with Cody, and Mark Henry could still very easily end up in the SD World Title picture.

With Rock involved in the main event, as well as Foley dropping the occasional WM hint from time to time, I think we are seeing all we will see of non regular talent from that time period.

 

[JAZ]

although HIGHLY doubtful, i think this is setting for a triple threat match with HHH/HBK/UT. Even though HBK is retired, i feel that there are a few more matches in him here and there. as the great MacGruber once said: "never ever, say never ever."

 

[jrichardson25]

I see it. "The End of an Era" could refer to the end of their respective active careers. HBK is retired. I'm sure the itch to compete is there but he finished his career and is happy with playing with guns and living his life. I respect that to no end. As a fan I'd love to see him one more time but I won't be pissed if he keeps to his word unlike Ric Flair...

As for Triple H and Undertaker. If Taker can barely walk on his own he needs to finish his career and ride off into the sunset. Trips and Taker are the end of the main event of the Attitude Era... it happens. Everyone knew it would happen eventually.

Will anyone call him out on it?

Who knows. I'd sure as hell hope not. The rest of them are either injured right now or have been MIA from ring action for some time. The feud needs to not bloat at all.

 

[mrfantastic111]

HHH was right that they are the last of an era, but what I think he meant is that he's the last of the attitude era main eventers. Since the attitude era ended we've been through the post-attitude/pre-pg era, and guys like HBK, Taker, Rocky and Austin all dropped back abit so that guys like Lesnar, Batista, Cena and Orton could take their go. Now Orton, Cena etc are handing the torch over to the next era of stars like Punk and Ziggler. Christian, Mark Henry etc only just moved into the main event scene. Christian and Mark Henry never passed the torch to guys like Batista and Cena; Cena had already won about ten world titles before either Mark or Christian won a WWE world title.

Respectfully, Christian, Mark Henry, Goldust etc were all apart of the attitude era, but when you think 'attitude era..." in your head, you think of the main eventers that made wrestling popular during this period of time, such as Austin and Rocky.

 

[GameOver]

Triple H pointed it out this week and he's almost certainly correct. He, HBK(although he's retired), and Taker are the only remaining superstars from a different time, the attitude era.

Now they may be the biggest stars left but that's obviously not a true statement.Let me know if I've overlooked anyone but Kane, Christian, Mark Henry, and Goldust were all part of the different time HHH was referring to.

Is it possible that some other attitude era guys who are still around might get involved or get offended and call HHH out on it?

Yup Taker, Triple H, HBK, Goldust were all there b4 the attitude era kicked off during the New Generation. So they are even older then the last of the Attitude era Henry/Kane came in at the start of and early on in the attitude era. William Regal is still there too technically and he was Attitude era WWE and what about JR, Lawler and Booker T they were all around during that period, hell even Michael Cole was

But how many people in the audience or watching at home would be aware of that or what came b4 in detail?

 

[RavensEdge]

For all you idiots the Attitude Era was the WWF, WCW, and ECW Wars that was goin on during that period and it doesn't belong to any one promotion.
Here's a list of the current Attitude Era (WWF, WCW, ECW) guys that are w/ the WWE right now:
Chris Jericho
Kane
R-Truth
Rey Mysterio, Jr.
Triple H
The Big Show
Christian
Mick Foley (when Active)
Mark Henry
The Undetaker
Dustin Rhodes aka Goldust
Booker T
William Regal
Jerry Lawler
These are the final members of that era that is still around. So once these guys retired from the WWE it will be the end of that ERA.

everyone that takes part in these forums knows all those guys were active during the mid 90's, or attitude era. but we also know that even though the wwe will release "best of's" wcw and ecw they will never aknowledge on tv that either one existed. that ended after the invasion storyline.

truth did participate to a point as k-kwik and lawler has been around since 93 or so but neither of them were around very long in a wrestling role. the only name on your list i can say counts is Foley, and I kick myself for skipping him. He was huge during the attitude era and just now resurfaced and has made it known that he wants to be part of WM. Given his history with Taker I'd have to say now that if I had to choose someone to interfere at all in this storyline it would be him.

 

[Best in the World 79]

He used that as a "broad example" by saying the 'attitude ere.'

You see, Undertaker debuted as the taker in 1990. Way before HHH ever even was on the scene. HHH blew up in the attitude era. Undertaker was already a star. He beat Hogan for the belt in 1991.

Yeah, guys like Kane, Christian, Mark Henry, Golddust, people of that nature were around. But none were anywhere close to the level that undertaker was.

HBK may have been in the business longer, or on the wwf scene before taker, but i may be wrong, but shawns first ic title reign was after taker won the WWF TITLE. So, taker was the man before HBK, and long before HHH.

Now HHH was great during his career, but face facts...just like this past summer with the punk angle, he can't stand by long enough to see someome blow up, especially if he doesn't like them personally, he just had to get involved and ruin the whole storyline. bringing nash in was pointless. all that did was cut punk's momentum in half and bring a pointless match between hhh and nash that fucking david otunga announced.

Undertaker is the greatest character in the history of the business. There is a reason he was called the phenom. Taker may be vince mcmahon's favortite child, other than austin.

Some may not like taker, but he is a consimate professional. His wwf/e career has been spun out over nearly 22 years. I belive he started in the business in 86...

So... Undertaker is by-far the last on an actual era. not the attitude era. The era of true character, toughness, loyalty... etc. Taker did HIAC 98 with a broken ankle. Now how many guys on the roster now would do even a house show with a broken ankle. Night in and night out, hurt, injured, broken bones.. even in his face. The man wrestled. Once taker is gone. There is no more legends. Cena will be. Orton will be. Punk will be. But it's different.

There will never be another Undertaker or anyone who ever comes overall close. So. Even if he's 65 and still wrestling once at mania. It's better for business. He's responsible so much for where we are today and he has earned the privelidge to wrestle once a year. A lot don't like it, but you can get the fuck over it. You'll understand when people like taker are no longer around and you have a bunch of "superstars" who bitch about being hurt and want more and more money, come from the real world and other tv shows, and a generic, bland music, no charisma, first and last name bullshit wrestlers. Since we're in the "reality era" and all. Wrestling is basically dead. They want a long living entertainment product.

Here's the difference. Wrestling is entertaining. You can't have an entertainment show and kinda wrestle. You'll get today's product.

 

[OhYeah!]

I think is the end of an era because of Taker leaving, and Triple H is as usual trying to steal the spot light by including himself. In the big picture, Triple H is not at the level of Shawn Michaels or The Undertaker, not even close. After Takes's gone, Im done with WWE too.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

He said that to get the nostalgia fans to watch. You know, you guys who say "HHH is right, they are the last of the amazing attitude era I wish they'd bring back". that's who this feud and HHH is targeting when he says that. He's also targeting people who are more open minded and see it as sort of a historic match. Like if Chipper Jones has his last at bat with the braves down a run against the Mets with the bases loaded. Classic.

I don't think anyone is going to call HHH out because A) that's a horrible storyline idea and B) I don't think HHH is going to be in a feud of any kind after Mania. From a kayfabe standpoint I don't think it would happen because he's the COO and "from a previous era" is pretty vague.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

He used that as a "broad example" by saying the 'attitude ere.'

You see, Undertaker debuted as the taker in 1990. Way before HHH ever even was on the scene. HHH blew up in the attitude era. Undertaker was already a star. He beat Hogan for the belt in 1991.

Yeah, guys like Kane, Christian, Mark Henry, Golddust, people of that nature were around. But none were anywhere close to the level that undertaker was.

HBK may have been in the business longer, or on the wwf scene before taker, but i may be wrong, but shawns first ic title reign was after taker won the WWF TITLE. So, taker was the man before HBK, and long before HHH.

Now HHH was great during his career, but face facts...just like this past summer with the punk angle, he can't stand by long enough to see someome blow up, especially if he doesn't like them personally, he just had to get involved and ruin the whole storyline. bringing nash in was pointless. all that did was cut punk's momentum in half and bring a pointless match between hhh and nash that fucking david otunga announced.

Undertaker is the greatest character in the history of the business. There is a reason he was called the phenom. Taker may be vince mcmahon's favortite child, other than austin.

Some may not like taker, but he is a consimate professional. His wwf/e career has been spun out over nearly 22 years. I belive he started in the business in 86...

So... Undertaker is by-far the last on an actual era. not the attitude era. The era of true character, toughness, loyalty... etc. Taker did HIAC 98 with a broken ankle. Now how many guys on the roster now would do even a house show with a broken ankle. Night in and night out, hurt, injured, broken bones.. even in his face. The man wrestled. Once taker is gone. There is no more legends. Cena will be. Orton will be. Punk will be. But it's different.

There will never be another Undertaker or anyone who ever comes overall close. So. Even if he's 65 and still wrestling once at mania. It's better for business. He's responsible so much for where we are today and he has earned the privelidge to wrestle once a year. A lot don't like it, but you can get the fuck over it. You'll understand when people like taker are no longer around and you have a bunch of "superstars" who bitch about being hurt and want more and more money, come from the real world and other tv shows, and a generic, bland music, no charisma, first and last name bullshit wrestlers. Since we're in the "reality era" and all. Wrestling is basically dead. They want a long living entertainment product.

Here's the difference. Wrestling is entertaining. You can't have an entertainment show and kinda wrestle. You'll get today's product.

I agree with the logic that Taker is truly the last of that era.

I disagree with the "how many people would wrestle a house show with a broken ankle". they dont' have a choice now. WWE actually gives a shit about their well being. they don't want John Cena to be like Undertaker and only be able to wrestle once a year. They don't want Daniel Bryan to snap and smother AJ under a pillow. they don't want CM Punk to be found dead with an empty bottle of pills. Also, how do you know that modern guys "complain about being hurt and ask for more money" you sound like a grumpy old man bitching about how much the young punk with a college degree makes despite you working at a company for longer. The modern guys are younger than the roster was back in the day. they are more athletic (yea really). They are more educated. In other words, they don't get manipulated by the people at the top as easily. It's not a bad thing to question the company you work for.


I agree about HHH. He's fuckin shit up when he gets involved. HHH is great as the guy next to the top guy. HBK as the reff is a horrible idea. May as well just jerk each other off for 20 minutes.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that you put taker in a different class than Cena. Cena wrestles hurt and does a LOT more appearances than Taker ever did.

I agree that taker has the greatest character ever. It's so iconic.

Wrestling isn't dead, you're nuts if you think that. In 1988, wrestling was more hokey and less wrestling. Today you see more actual wrestling and more competitive matches than you did back in the day. stop letting nostalgia change your perception. Back in the day, yea, they wrestled 300 times a year, but like 70% of those matches were squashes. There were squashes at wrestlemania. Like Jim Cornett said "it used to be, the crowd believed the two guys were killing each other but they weren't, now, guys are killing each other and the crowd thinks it's fake".

"entertainment show and kinda wrestle" so basically you're saying that the golden era and the attitude era shouldn't have been a success? The golden era was "squash, squash, squash, champion promo, squash, main event between main eventer and midcarder". Attitude era was "3 minute match with a run in, 3 minute match with a run in, face turn, heel turn, face turn, heel turn, 3 minute match with a run in, ridiculous segment about boobs or piss or shit or something, insanely contrived hardcore match, 3 minute match with a run in, austin does something crazy".

I challenge you to actually go back and watch every show and every match from the old days. It's difficult to do.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I think is the end of an era because of Taker leaving, and Triple H is as usual trying to steal the spot light by including himself. In the big picture, Triple H is not at the level of Shawn Michaels or The Undertaker, not even close. After Takes's gone, Im done with WWE too.

That's not fair at all. HHH is the one guy who continued to carry the tourch after the attitude era. Austin and The Rock were gone. Angle then left, Michaels missed the attitude era due to injury, and the Undertaker has been on again off again for what seems like the past 10 years. HHH carried the company while everone was either retiered or semi active.

Also his accomplishments are on par with Taker and Michaels. He deserves to be mentioned with them and all the other greats.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

First of all, I'd like to point out that I find the way this match is being billed, very confusing.

What I'd like to know is what they mean by "the end of an era". I mean, is Triple H saying that after this match, he won't wrestle again. Because logically speaking, if Triple H believes that he will "put him down", doesn't that still mean that Triple H will be able to wrestle? To me, the stipulation of the match implies that both of their careers will end with this match but neither of them is saying that.

I see this match as false advertising because neither is saying it will be their final match so it isn't truly the end of an era (1990-1995 WWF assuming that's what they're referring to).

 

[wrestlingfanatic98]

Now I disagree with many saying kane was not up there, if we mean over the 15 year time span I agree, but the attitude era all the way up to 2002 early 2004, kane was one of the big players of the WWE. Kane was a huge name in the attitude era, in 98 perhaps the WWF's most intense years kane was one of the big 6 stars of that company. The summer of 1998, stone cold undertaker kane and mankind were feuding with eachother, vince had taker and kane to protect him and the WWF title evolved around vince shane stone cold undertaker kane and mankind. The corporation kane was a huge part of that storyline is well. Look at the DX helmsley era in 99, who were the big 3 names they targeted, rock mankind and kane.

Undertaker's entire role in the attitude era was involving stone cold and kane, go look through 97 2001 how many times did undertaker and kane cross paths or were aligning themselves with each other, in late 98 kane was the reason why undertaker was buried alive by austinm to say kane was not of that level many clearly have not done their homework. Yes kane went down a level when he was with Xpac, but bit by bit undertaker and kane would clash again. When the ministry of darkness storyline with vince and shane came to an end, undertaker once again crossed path's with kane. Undertaker's last ever appearance in 1999 was costing kane the inferno match.

When the faction was forged in 2000, who were the 3 names that clashed with the faction? rock undertaker and kane. When kane turned heel in 2000 undertaker and kane would hate each other again, and through out 2000 these 2 would fight one on one, either trying to beat rock for the title, or beat angle. The rumble match in 2001 taker and kane were one of the big 5 along with stone cold rock rikishi to win the match. The invasion storyline came about, who were the names involved? stone cold angle undertaker kane Y2J rock when he returned.

So during that 7 year time span from the attitude era, early years of the ruthless aggression era, kane was very much one of the big names of those era's. After that kane fell away, but in the attitude era he played a huge role in the WWF/E big storylines of that time period. The only storyline he was not involved with was the ministry of darkness storyline, and that says allot for the big red machine in those years of the WWF

 

[Domo Nation]

I agree with the logic that Taker is truly the last of that era.

I disagree with the "how many people would wrestle a house show with a broken ankle". they dont' have a choice now. WWE actually gives a shit about their well being. they don't want John Cena to be like Undertaker and only be able to wrestle once a year. They don't want Daniel Bryan to snap and smother AJ under a pillow. they don't want CM Punk to be found dead with an empty bottle of pills. Also, how do you know that modern guys "complain about being hurt and ask for more money" you sound like a grumpy old man bitching about how much the young punk with a college degree makes despite you working at a company for longer. The modern guys are younger than the roster was back in the day. they are more athletic (yea really). They are more educated. In other words, they don't get manipulated by the people at the top as easily. It's not a bad thing to question the company you work for.


I agree about HHH. He's fuckin shit up when he gets involved. HHH is great as the guy next to the top guy. HBK as the reff is a horrible idea. May as well just jerk each other off for 20 minutes.

I think it's pretty ridiculous that you put taker in a different class than Cena. Cena wrestles hurt and does a LOT more appearances than Taker ever did.

I agree that taker has the greatest character ever. It's so iconic.

Wrestling isn't dead, you're nuts if you think that. In 1988, wrestling was more hokey and less wrestling. Today you see more actual wrestling and more competitive matches than you did back in the day. stop letting nostalgia change your perception. Back in the day, yea, they wrestled 300 times a year, but like 70% of those matches were squashes. There were squashes at wrestlemania. Like Jim Cornett said "it used to be, the crowd believed the two guys were killing each other but they weren't, now, guys are killing each other and the crowd thinks it's fake".

"entertainment show and kinda wrestle" so basically you're saying that the golden era and the attitude era shouldn't have been a success? The golden era was "squash, squash, squash, champion promo, squash, main event between main eventer and midcarder". Attitude era was "3 minute match with a run in, 3 minute match with a run in, face turn, heel turn, face turn, heel turn, 3 minute match with a run in, ridiculous segment about boobs or piss or shit or something, insanely contrived hardcore match, 3 minute match with a run in, austin does something crazy".

I challenge you to actually go back and watch every show and every match from the old days. It's difficult to do.

Wow.....this is one of the most bogus things I have ever read on this site. I hope you were just trying to troll and not be serious. Tell Christian being forced to compete while injured that the WWE cares more about wrestlers than they used to. Same goes for Mark Henry having to wrestle repeatedly after Big Show botched (like he always does, the oaf) that chair spot. And Zack Ryder getting tossed from a wheelchair AFTER Kane already messed up his back. WWE does not care about the well-being of its superstars any more than they did back in the day.

I bet you actually would pay 60 bucks to watch HBK and HHH jerk each other off for 20 minutes too, since you brought it up out of nowhere. Having watched almost every match the WWF/WWE has put on, I can tell you that you are totally off base, and to be quite frank, ignorant when it comes to your assessment of previous eras of wrestling. The Attitude Era was complete and utter trash, I'll give you that. No denying that fact. Hate all you want, but the things you call squashes back in the day were actually how REAL stars were made and got over. Tell me that if Del Rio or someone like that came back and went undefeated for like three months, with all his wins coming in less than three minutes, that he wouldn't have insane heat by the end of it. Oh wait, you can't, cause it worked for Mark Henry last year.

Try actually watching wrestling before you try and sound smart. You're embarrassing yourself, your family, and everybody who might agree with your line of "thinking."

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Well, in many ways, it is the end of an era. Stone Cold is retired due to injuries, The Rock's career as a wrestler has been truly over for about 8 years, HBK is officially retired and has overall moved on with his life to other things, Triple H's in-ring career is virtually over as he's been preparing to eventually take the reigns from Vince when he steps down, Edge is retired due to injury, Kurt Angle is in TNA & isn't quite what he used to be, The Undertaker is now a special attraction for WM as his injuries have caught up with him & probably make working a full schedule unrealistic, Vince is hardly ever seen on television anymore and he was one of the greatest villains in wrestling history, Chris Jericho has been doing other things the past few years and is only back because, quite frankly, he loves the business. He could leave tomorrow without a second's regret.

While there are still stars in WWE that were part of the Attitude Era, these were really the top guys. These were the handful of guys that truly, truly stood out among the pack.

To me, the storyline makes perfect sense and has been extremely well done. Taker has done it all and is one of the few stars that you can say is truly above championships. The Streak is really all he has left and the man that ends it will have a huge feather in his cap. The Streak is the Mt. Everest of WWE but, unlike Everest, nobody has conquered Taker at WrestleMania. The characters of HBK & Triple H are very prideful and have pretty healthy egos. They're two of the best overall pro wrestlers of their generation and they have the accomplishments, feuds & matches to back it up. HBK couldn't get it done. He wanted to beat Taker so badly at WM that he put his career on the line, but came up short. Trips came out last year and wanted to do the same, he wanted to be "the one" but he failed as well. However, in Trips' mind, he did indeed win the war as Taker was carried out and hasn't been seen since. Now, Trips has other responsibilities and part of said responsibilities is to ensure the future of the WWE. It's true also that Taker is sort of seen as a brand. He's a legend that's respected by wrestling insiders and fans alike, so Trips' reluctance to face Taker again, after having almost a year to reflect on what Taker's meant coupled with what he's come to realize as an executive, makes sense from a business standpoint. At the same time, however, Trips' does think he can do it and the fact that he didn't is something that's gnawed at him, otherwise he wouldn't have agreed. That's that pesky ego thing come back into play.

 

[sikkbones]

you know i honestly think that HHH is calling it an end of an era when referring to the fact they are the last of the 80's and 90's gimmicks....

Remeber that HHH started out as a Connecticut blue blood with the whole outfit and everything, and at one point a black butler as his valet/manager.

ANd undertaker was Well, an Undertaker at first... I think is possibly what HHH means, they are the last of the Gimmick Wrestlers as NO one from that ERA is still in WWE, Golddust and Nash don't count they are semi retired.

The rest of the Wrestlers still wrestling from the Gimmick era are either in the indys, or In TNA.

 

[Wrestlemania 20-0]

Undertaker is in the business since 1984,3 decades and a half more than any superstars of the WWE.
his carachter was the last or you have an clown like Doink,the berzerker,Earthquake and alls funny gimmicks in the 90's.

 

[midgensa]

I think this storyline has been nearly flawless. I have to guess that the second the agreed upon the ending of the 19-0 match last year they knew they were going to set up this 20-0 match this year.

They did such a fantastic job last year of letting Taker get the "win" but also appear the loser at the same time ... and it has left it open for someone like HHH to have that just completely gnaw at him. When he tombstoned Taker and stuck his tongue out only to have the Dead Man kick out? It started gnawing at him right then and there.

The build up for this has been fantastic and HHH's character has to believe that to beat Undertaker he has to end his career, because he did everything but that last year and lost. HBK's character has to WANT his friend to win and WANT his friend to lose all at the same time. And Undertaker's character has to THINK he is going to get screwed, but STILL get the job done.

All three of these exceptional performers are painting this storyline exactly as it has to be done and it is truly top notch. It will be the end of an era ... the end of the HBK/HHH/Undertaker era which will be a four-year period that gave us four brilliantly executed matches.