twitter google-plus feed2 chevron
×

Triple H provides explanation as to why he defeated Sting at Wrestlemania


  • david young

    Sting should have came in and build a year long run to Wrestlemania 32 with the Undertaker. I would have had Sting start a program with Taker at Royal Rumble, costing him the rumble match. Sting would then return for Summerslam to defeat Undertaker. The two would have a second match at Survivor Series with Sting going 2-0 against the Dead Man. Taker would go away with Sting then going for the WWE Title at Royal Rumble. Taker would cost Sting the match and the two would have settled things in a retirement match at Wrestlemania 32 with Taker getting the win.

  • Soulshroude

    Serious cop-out. HHH knows that’s not the truth. Let’s hear it from Stings perspective. That he was ultimately used.

  • Rinn13

    “How come you didn’t put over the only major WCW legend that had never worked for WWE in his LONE Wrestlemania match?”

    “Ego”.

    Honestly, it should have been Taker vs. Sting, Time Limit Draw or something, at WM30, and then Taker should have retired. That way would have gotten Taker vs. Sting, and then he never would have lost to Lesnar (or Reigns).

  • oppa

    He beat Sting because the narrative that HHH and Stephanie tried to make 20 years ago was that HHH was the greatest wrestler of all time due to him beating everyone. If you take an honest look at WWE, that time period is when WWE ratings and attendance started going downhill.

  • CC

    Beating Sting would get him over so he could face The Rock a year later?
    At which point did HHH need to “get over” that late in his career? And why would beating Sting lead to a match with The Rock? Surely if they wanted HHH to face The Rock at the next WM they could just book it, pretty much like they always do, with out any actual reason. I just do not get the connection between Sting and The Rock.