Report: Unhappiness Backstage over Triple H's Promo on Raw?
It appears Triple H's promo at the end of Monday's Raw may have caused some unhappiness backstage.
Triple H's lengthy and controversial tearing down of Daniel Bryan and several others, like Chris Jericho, Edge and Rob Van Dam, for failing to prove themselves as "the guy" who could carry the company has already caused a fuss in certain circles. An offended Jericho even took to his official Twitter account after the show to respond to the star's accusations.
(Granted, this could be an angle, but it's hard to believe Jericho was thrilled at being dismissed in such a manner on live TV, especially when he's always been so loyal to WWE.)
Per Mike Johnson over at PWInsider, several people in WWE were also dismayed by Triple H's comments:
There were a lot of people shaking their heads at Triple H's comments about Daniel Bryan not being a star, feeling he was burying him as a performer as opposed to being a villain that was knocking the hero in a way Bryan could get back at him. Unless they are building to Bryan vs. HHH with Bryan winning, I can totally see that point.
No doubt if you asked Triple H about his promo, he would claim it was done solely to aid the storyline and make fans desperate to see Bryan prove everyone wrong and win. Maybe he even believes this to be true.
However, rather than establishing Bryan as the ultimate underdog, Triple H's constant stream of scathing "work/shoot" comments are fast becoming counterproductive.
They seem to exist only to make the former WWE champion look weak and inept. How can we see Bryan as a star when we're constantly told he's not?
And it's hard to imagine Triple H agreeing to putting over the star in some high-profile match somewhere down the line, too. So, really, what's the point in all of this?
Were Triple H's comments harmful to WWE?
Similarly, the executive's petty comments about Van Dam, Edge and Jericho also strongly reek of someone interested mainly in fueling their own ego, rather than aiding WWE or its business in any meaningful way.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?