For Debate: Who had the better career?

Who had the better career?


  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .

Millz

LGB
Staff member
V.I.P.
#1
Who do you think has had the better career? (Up to this point in time)

Triple H

or

Shawn Michaels


Who you got?
 

Shooting_Palanx

The Rock is cooking atm..
#2
Hmmm....I'd have to go with Triple H overall, based soley on title wins and major pushes, as well as Wrestlemania appearances (not sure of the stats, but I dunno).

I just feel Trips had the better career overall.
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
#3
I think you have to take into consideration that Shawn Michaels missed some of his best years due to a back injury. Just imagine the matches he could of add in those four years...It's a lot like Ted Williams missing some seasons in the Majors because he served in the army.

With that being said, I believe that wrestling wise Shawn Michaels had the better career, he had a great tag team run with The Rockers and we all know what he did as an individual wrestler. Accomplishment wise, I don't think you can argue with HHH.
 

Millz

LGB
Staff member
V.I.P.
#4
I painfully choose Triple H in this poll.

Yes, Shawn Michaels is in my PERSONAL top 5 of all time and Triple H isn't but its hard to ignore the proof that is right in front of us. I mean for one thing Triple H has been one of if not the top guy in the entire business for the last decade.

Shawn Michaels wrestled fewer matches even though he wrestled better matches. Triple H didn't have to "retire" because he broke his back. Shawn Michaels has also main evented fewer WrestleManias.

We base most things of championships, right? I mean Dan Marino is <<< Joe Montana because Joe won the big one. Look at the proof...

Triple H's stats

Won the World Heavyweight Title 5 times
Won the WWE Title 8 times
Won the European title 2 times
Won the Intercontinental title 5 times
Won the Tag Team titles 3 times
1997 King of the Ring
2002 Royal Rumble winner
2nd Grand Slam Champion
He also won several feud of the year awards (W/ Angle & Benoit for starters)

(credit wikipedia with this info)

Shawn Michaels won 4 World Titles...he doesn't even come close to the accomplishments of Triple H. But oh there's the people who say he was screwing the bosses daughter and that's why he got the push that he did. Well, guess what. Shawn Michaels almost politicked Vince McMahon out of business with the kliq that he was the head of. Neither of them were or are saints.

I think Shawn Michaels was easily the better wrestler. Hell, I don't think anybody is better then Shawn. But if you look at it from a broad sense then HHH had the better career. And hell, his isn't over yet folks.
 

Anthony1975

Registered Member
#5
Triple H has achieved more although marrying the bosses daughter certainly got him where he is today. Shawn is far and away the more talented of the 2, far more exciting to watch and has put on far better performances. Yep I await the backlash from the Triple H fanboys of this forum.
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
#6
Triple H has achieved more although marrying the bosses daughter certainly got him where he is today. Shawn is far and away the more talented of the 2, far more exciting to watch and has put on far better performances. Yep I await the backlash from the Triple H fanboys of this forum.
I agree with you Anthony, but I don't believe it helped him get to the top as much as you do.

HHH had an average start in the WWF, but then they changed his whole gimmick and took the torch and ran with it. There’s a reason why he got such a big push and that’s because he was good on the microphone, he could put on a good match if needed to and he had the charisma of being a good heel. Yes, I do think marrying Steph had a bit to do with it, but like I’ve said on these forums in the past, if Funaki married Steph instead, he wouldn’t of won all those titles like HHH did.
 

Millz

LGB
Staff member
V.I.P.
#7
I do think marrying Stephanie aided him in some capacity but its definitely overblown by Triple H haters out there. I dont think he'd have won this many World Titles but he certainly would have been an alltime great the way he was going.

Regardless of anything...Vince McMahon makes the final decisions...not Triple H.
 

Unity

#WOKEN
Staff member
#8
I went with Trips; I think he'd still be a world-class pro wrestler without his status in the McMahon family. He was on this path while he was still with Chyna...he belongs in the same breath of what made the attitude era work so well, along with Stone Cold, The Rock, and The Undertaker.

And yeah, along with the accomplishments championship-wise look at what HHH has done with stables, etc.


-Leader of Evolution

-Took Degeneration X to the top without HBK

-So many huge and quality feuds with almost every wrestler I can think of. Shawn had great ones, don't get me wrong, but I think Triple H's covered a wider and more diverse base of Superstars. Even during monthlong forgettable feuds (like his heel championship defense against Booker T), you can tell he put his all into every moment.

-Made a much better heel than Shawn, IMO.
 

Babe_Ruth

Sultan of Swat
Staff member
V.I.P.
#9
I think it’s debatable who was the better heel between the two wrestlers. Shawn Michaels was a great heel in my opinion. One of the reasons why HHH was so easy to hate is because he always had the title around his waist and won by cheating all the time(using his sledgehammer)

If you watch his heel run after turning his back on Marty Janetty and during the Attitude ERA you’ll see how great of a heel he was. Were just use having him as a face, because that’s what he’s been for the most part during the last few years of his career.
 

Rastisrules

Registered Member
#10
Im kind of torn between these two.

While Triple H has more title wins under his name in comparison to Michaels, Michaels "Prime" was in an era where world title changes were not that common. People would hold the belt for more then 2-3 months at a time before dropping it.
Michaels had 3 in a span of 2-3 years before his initial retirement, while you look at hunter who has won 5 within that same span(as well as a few others) , but its mostly a difference of eras.

As far as longevity goes, Hunter would win that battle but that's mainly because of the back injury to HBK.

The latter part of Michaels career, after his feud with hunter and his return, was mainly to push the younger guys while HHH is just now beginning to really enter that stage.

I cant really decide between the two so ill just be biased and go with HBK.
 
Last edited: