|
|
Post by D. Dodge Silver on Aug 7, 2012 16:32:12 GMT -5
I would argue that HBK has had one of the least effective retirements ever. Since the HBK/Taker match, HBK has essentially been a non-wrestling member of the active roster. That's fine, if that was what it was supposed to be (a la Randy Savage after losing the career match).
Any other nominees for "least effective retirement"? I give Jericho a pass, he's never really retired, just pursued other interests from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orion Hardy on Aug 7, 2012 17:21:15 GMT -5
You can't class a few one off appearances as being a member of the active roster. It is funny though that he's retired, yet we see him more than the Undertaker, the man that retired him.
|
|
|
|
Post by D. Dodge Silver on Aug 7, 2012 17:39:45 GMT -5
A few "one off" appearances is fine. But, HBK has been central to two major angles.
|
|
LAVAJava
Junior Member
It's all opinions.
Posts: 50
|
Post by LAVAJava on Aug 7, 2012 18:42:20 GMT -5
You never retire from pro wrestling in the sense of not making appearances these days! Everyone comes back in the end- unless you pass away or are Bruno Sammartino!
With HBK, what makes the difference is whether he keeps his word and doesn't ever wrestle again. Recent interview with him suggested he could be getting itchy feet...
I would say Steve Austin. For one, hardly anybody knew he was retiring, then he was kayfabe fired by Bischoff and 2 months later back as GM, so in that sense his retirement was BS. It's all blurred lines, all these guys are involved with WWE later on at some point.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Canton on Aug 7, 2012 18:53:13 GMT -5
He's been retired for over two years and this is his second storyline since. And you're complaining why?
|
|
|
|
Post by stonercc on Aug 7, 2012 19:15:54 GMT -5
Im still pissed at Flair for the send off WWE gave him, then all the bs he did in TNA.
|
|
|
|
Post by D. Dodge Silver on Aug 7, 2012 21:15:09 GMT -5
I'm not complaining... just pointing out that out of his two years of being retired, he's spent probably a quarter of it involved in angles, making it not much of a retirement. HBK can come back full-time and that would be fine with me. He can keep showing up once every six months, and that's fine, too.
The trouble is, when he really is ready to go home for good, he'll be back for the Flair-level send off he deserves, but, who's gonna believe he's really leaving this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Crazy on Aug 7, 2012 23:29:51 GMT -5
Im still pissed at Flair for the send off WWE gave him, then all the bs he did in TNA. yea, i kinda seen that as a slap in the face to wwe :/ |
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjoe on Aug 8, 2012 10:25:45 GMT -5
The least effect retirement has to be Terry Funk. He's retired like 20-30 times.
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelcole on Aug 9, 2012 7:06:40 GMT -5
I can empathise with Flair regarding returning to the ring. Look at his well documented out of ring problems. He really, really needed the money. It's unfortunate after a great career like his that he will never be financially stable. It would be nice to see him back in WWE in a non wrestling role.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt Ouellette on Aug 9, 2012 12:44:11 GMT -5
A few "one off" appearances is fine. But, HBK has been central to two major angles. That's debatable. He's involved, yes, but the center? No way. Sure, he was the referee in the WM match, but here he's just going to be at ringside. The angles hardly revolved around him. He hasn't wrestled at all, so he's retired. I'm gonna have to go with Ric Flair. After the HUGE send-off he got. The ceremony, the Hall of Fame, the WM match with HBK he kinda ruined it by going to TNA. |
|
|
|
Post by dbudasi on Aug 22, 2012 10:43:19 GMT -5
How about Foley?
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt Ouellette on Aug 23, 2012 17:09:29 GMT -5
Yeah, that's a good one. As much as I'm a fan of Foley, he seemed very committed to retiring in 2000. Then he had a bit of a part-time comeback and was TNA world champion in 2009. Clearly not going out into the sunset as he once described it. |
|
