What Are The Odds Of Triple H Retiring After Wrestlemania?

[Lockard 23]

I love that picture.

Anyway, what are the odds of Triple H actually retiring after losing to Brock Lesnar? Given how predictable the outcome of the three top matches are (Cena finally defeating The Rock and winning the WWE Title again in the process, Triple H getting his revenge over Lesnar, Undertaker going to 21-0 and reclaiming the urn), something tells me there is a twist in there somewhere. Like one of those three matches will have a different outcome than what we expect.

And of the three, it seems Lesnar defeating HHH and sending him packing is more plausible than the other two alternatives. If Cena lost, he'd just win the following month and from a story POV, him picking up the win at Wrestlemania is best anyway. CM Punk breaking the streak just right before taking time off isn't happening, and it'd be underwhelming for this storyline to be the build to Taker's legendary streak ending, and just plain dumb for the streak not to be apart of the big 30th Wrestlemania show. That leaves Lesnar winning and Triple H calling it a career.

Many find it hard to believe that Triple H would let a monster heel like Lesnar - who broke his arm twice, broke his best friend's arm and attacked his father-in-law and put him in the hospital - be the one to retire him. After all, his best friends Shawn Michaels and Ric Flair both retired at Wrestlemania against guys they respected and that the fans loved. Would Triple H really do the opposite?

In my opinion, it's plausible that he would. The reason is because they can easily play it up in a "you won the battle, but I won the war." sort of way. If Brock won but walked out barely standing, that would show that it was no easy feat for Lesnar to defeat HHH, and HHH could say he left the monster barely standing afterwards. Yeah, he won, but it's still not a victory he can gloat about. Another possibility is Lesnar trying to inflict further damage after the match but Triple H destroying him in the process and leaving him laying, despite him just getting the official victory minutes before. Another idea is Triple H giving a retirement speech the next night and being welcomed with a "Thank You, Hunter" ovation from the crowd, only for Lesnar to interrupt and cause another fight to break out, with Lesnar being laid out. Same as the second idea, only it happens the next night instead.

This way, HHH loses but still gets his 'revenge' in a way and goes out looking like a champ. Meanwhile, Lesnar wins and gets to walk on still undefeated (minus the Cena victory) and HHH is still gonna pop up time from time in his COO character and play a role here and there when its appropriate. And when it comes down to it, we all know complete 100% retirement is usually rare in wrestling unless there's a doctor telling you you could cripple yourself if you step in the ring just one more time. So there's always that chance HHH could step back in the ring a time or two more down the road, even though being the wrestling traditionalist he is, I would think he would want to honor the retirement by sticking to it and never wrestling again, just like his friend Michaels.

 

[Danielson]

Um it's 80% he will lose and retire, and return whenever he deems plausable despite losing.

 

[Lockard 23]

You're one of the few who think this. Most assume he will defeat Brock Lesnar and that's what the dirtsheet reports (for whatever that's worth) are reporting are the plans. I don't think they'd add this retirement stipulation unless he was either winning or losing and ACTUALLY staying retired, given he's already semi-retired.

 

[Leo C]

I'm not sure, really. I could see it going either way, HHH winning or Lesnar retiring him. I'm on the fence.

 

[Mustafar Reginald]

I don't really think it's going to be the case but I suppose it's a least plausible, unlike Rock beating Cena or Punk beating Taker. I don't think the line of reasoning that everything seems too predictable really works here though. For one thing, it's a bit too optimistic of WWE for my taste, and they've given us no inclination to believe they'll break their predictability. But also, their aren't only three matches on the card if they wanted to break they wanted to "swerve" us or give us a twist. Dolph cashing in, or The Shield winning + an Orton heel turn. My point is they have plenty of material potentially planned to pull the trigger on it that can leave a big impact on a lot of the universe without having to involve the to top three. Granted, it may not be much of a shock to many of us, but then again we are in a thread hypothesizing on Lesnar beating Triple H and Trips retiring, so I don't think that's much of a problem. Moving on from one of your lines of reasoning here (probably the smallest and just what sparked this discussion).

Every-time I think about the reasons to why Brock would win, my mind immediately jumps to reasons that contradict said reason. For example, I can't think of anyone else that Triple H could wrestle post-Lesnar, looking at the roster it would be ideal for him to retire. He's faced everybody he needed to. Then I remember that this second match with Lesnar is also pretty pointless and doesn't really serve much point, especially if he's losing. Well, I guess there is the whole retiring at Mania thing . . . meh, that's decent reasoning. I don't feel like listing the others now. Also, wouldn't HHH being a wrestling traditionalist mean he'd be more inclined to have his career ended by somebody that is not on Lesnar's level? But rather lose it to someone like Sheamus? Finally (for this paragraph) I don't entirely like the post-WrestleMania retirement speech angle. Seems like a really weak ending to the feud.

To wrap this ramblings up, the reason I don't believe he'll lose and am still placing my bets on Trips winning is because of the booking. Maybe this adds to your suspicions about a twist, but this feud from all I've seen/read has been booked in the traditional manner to indicate Trips is winning. There really isn't anything that separates this from any other revenge match feud than the participants involved. The booking seems to really build to the finish of Trips exacting his revenge on Lesnar and getting his win. The best I can compare it to is the build to the Cena/Rock feud, nothing they've presented from all I've seen/read that gives me reason to believe that Cena will lose. Maybe I'm too strongly influenced by my preconceived predictions on this match, but I don't see it happening for this reasoning, and the few others I brought up (and I could bring up other little ones like WrestleMania traditionally being where the faces prevails). It's plausible but I don't really see it happening. I wouldn't really be shocked if it did happen, and you can probably gauge how probable I think it is from that.

 

[Zack Ryder]

Hmm.... If he retires, he'll probably be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

 

[Swift]

Plausible I suppose, but not probable.

 

[Lockard 23]

I don't really think it's going to be the case but I suppose it's a least plausible, unlike Rock beating Cena or Punk beating Taker. I don't think the line of reasoning that everything seems too predictable really works here though. For one thing, it's a bit too optimistic of WWE for my taste, and they've given us no inclination to believe they'll break their predictability. But also, their aren't only three matches on the card if they wanted to break they wanted to "swerve" us or give us a twist. Dolph cashing in, or The Shield winning + an Orton heel turn. My point is they have plenty of material potentially planned to pull the trigger on it that can leave a big impact on a lot of the universe without having to involve the to top three. Granted, it may not be much of a shock to many of us, but then again we are in a thread hypothesizing on Lesnar beating Triple H and Trips retiring, so I don't think that's much of a problem. Moving on from one of your lines of reasoning here (probably the smallest and just what sparked this discussion).

Every-time I think about the reasons to why Brock would win, my mind immediately jumps to reasons that contradict said reason. For example, I can't think of anyone else that Triple H could wrestle post-Lesnar, looking at the roster it would be ideal for him to retire. He's faced everybody he needed to. Then I remember that this second match with Lesnar is also pretty pointless and doesn't really serve much point, especially if he's losing. Well, I guess there is the whole retiring at Mania thing . . . meh, that's decent reasoning. I don't feel like listing the others now. Also, wouldn't HHH being a wrestling traditionalist mean he'd be more inclined to have his career ended by somebody that is not on Lesnar's level? But rather lose it to someone like Sheamus? Finally (for this paragraph) I don't entirely like the post-WrestleMania retirement speech angle. Seems like a really weak ending to the feud.

To wrap this ramblings up, the reason I don't believe he'll lose and am still placing my bets on Trips winning is because of the booking. Maybe this adds to your suspicions about a twist, but this feud from all I've seen/read has been booked in the traditional manner to indicate Trips is winning. There really isn't anything that separates this from any other revenge match feud than the participants involved. The booking seems to really build to the finish of Trips exacting his revenge on Lesnar and getting his win. The best I can compare it to is the build to the Cena/Rock feud, nothing they've presented from all I've seen/read that gives me reason to believe that Cena will lose. Maybe I'm too strongly influenced by my preconceived predictions on this match, but I don't see it happening for this reasoning, and the few others I brought up (and I could bring up other little ones like WrestleMania traditionally being where the faces prevails). It's plausible but I don't really see it happening. I wouldn't really be shocked if it did happen, and you can probably gauge how probable I think it is from that.

You're right they don't need to give us a twist in one of the three big matches to surprise people, but it would have more of an impact there. As for the second point about him being a wrestling traditionalist, I don't see why him being one would mean he would put over a younger guy going out. Austin didn't when he retired ten years ago. Neither did Flair and Michaels, as I brought up. HHH might see it as going out in as big way as possible, a high profile match on the biggest stage of them all. This feud has been garnering pretty good ratings and it did boost a pretty big buy rate at Summerslam last year. However, with talent like Ambrose, Reigns, Rollins, Sandow (who he interacted with on Raw 1000), Wyatt coming in soon, etc., talent that he could a lot of good with in a feud, I could see strong reasons for believing that HHH isn't hanging them up yet.

As for your third point, I agree that it's been booked in a way that points towards the baby face winning, but the same can be said about Summerslam, which is why it was so surprising to see Brock go over, just one week after snapping HBK's arm in a rivalry that began with him snapping HHH's arm. Wrestlemania IS the place where baby faces usually go over but heels go over at times as well in big match situations. Let's not forget that HHH happened to be the one to break the mold at Wrestlemania 16 by being the first heel world champion to end the show victorious.

Hmm.... If he retires, he'll probably be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

There's already talks of a DX induction at next year's HOF, though I'd think Triple H would want his own individual induction first.

 

[Super Saiyan Goku]

I love that picture.

Anyway, what are the odds of Triple H actually retiring after losing to Brock Lesnar? Given how predictable the outcome of the three top matches are (Cena finally defeating The Rock and winning the WWE Title again in the process, Triple H getting his revenge over Lesnar, Undertaker going to 21-0 and reclaiming the urn), something tells me there is a twist in there somewhere. Like one of those three matches will have a different outcome than what we expect.

And of the three, it seems Lesnar defeating HHH and sending him packing is more plausible than the other two alternatives. If Cena lost, he'd just win the following month and from a story POV, him picking up the win at Wrestlemania is best anyway. CM Punk breaking the streak just right before taking time off isn't happening, and it'd be underwhelming for this storyline to be the build to Taker's legendary streak ending, and just plain dumb for the streak not to be apart of the big 30th Wrestlemania show. That leaves Lesnar winning and Triple H calling it a career.

Many find it hard to believe that Triple H would let a monster heel like Lesnar - who broke his arm twice, broke his best friend's arm and attacked his father-in-law and put him in the hospital - be the one to retire him. After all, his best friends Shawn Michaels and Ric Flair both retired at Wrestlemania against guys they respected and that the fans loved. Would Triple H really do the opposite?

In my opinion, it's plausible that he would. The reason is because they can easily play it up in a "you won the battle, but I won the war." sort of way. If Brock won but walked out barely standing, that would show that it was no easy feat for Lesnar to defeat HHH, and HHH could say he left the monster barely standing afterwards. Yeah, he won, but it's still not a victory he can gloat about. Another possibility is Lesnar trying to inflict further damage after the match but Triple H destroying him in the process and leaving him laying, despite him just getting the official victory minutes before. Another idea is Triple H giving a retirement speech the next night and being welcomed with a "Thank You, Hunter" ovation from the crowd, only for Lesnar to interrupt and cause another fight to break out, with Lesnar being laid out. Same as the second idea, only it happens the next night instead.

This way, HHH loses but still gets his 'revenge' in a way and goes out looking like a champ. Meanwhile, Lesnar wins and gets to walk on still undefeated (minus the Cena victory) and HHH is still gonna pop up time from time in his COO character and play a role here and there when its appropriate. And when it comes down to it, we all know complete 100% retirement is usually rare in wrestling unless there's a doctor telling you you could cripple yourself if you step in the ring just one more time. So there's always that chance HHH could step back in the ring a time or two more down the road, even though being the wrestling traditionalist he is, I would think he would want to honor the retirement by sticking to it and never wrestling again, just like his friend Michaels.

He not retired "tesanly" he part time like undertaker!

 

[Lockard 23]

I'd respond to you, but I don't know what word you mean to spell by "tesanly" so I can't.

 

[Mustafar Reginald]

You're right they don't need to give us a twist in one of the three big matches to surprise people, but it would have more of an impact there. As for the second point about him being a wrestling traditionalist, I don't see why him being one would mean he would put over a younger guy going out. Austin didn't when he retired ten years ago. Neither did Flair and Michaels, as I brought up. HHH might see it as going out in as big way as possible, a high profile match on the biggest stage of them all. This feud has been garnering pretty good ratings and it did boost a pretty big buy rate at Summerslam last year. However, with talent like Ambrose, Reigns, Rollins, Sandow (who he interacted with on Raw 1000), Wyatt coming in soon, etc., talent that he could a lot of good with in a feud, I could see strong reasons for believing that HHH isn't hanging them up yet.

As for your third point, I agree that it's been booked in a way that points towards the baby face winning, but the same can be said about Summerslam, which is why it was so surprising to see Brock go over, just one week after snapping HBK's arm in a rivalry that began with him snapping HHH's arm. Wrestlemania IS the place where baby faces usually go over but heels go over at times as well in big match situations. Let's not forget that HHH happened to be the one to break the mold at Wrestlemania 16 by being the first heel world champion to end the show victorious.

Okay, I probably shouldn't have just equated being a wrestling traditionalist with being more inclined to face someone of lesser status. That was dumb of me. But I still think Triple H is somebody who'd rather have his last match with someone who can truly benefit from it. I don't really see how Brock ending Trips career, especially if Trips wins the war, does more for him than his victory at SummerSlam.

I was hardly surprised about Brock winning. I was a bit more surprised it was by submission (which doesn't really make sense but I was) and the only reason I even doubted Brock winning was because of those reports stating Vince blew a casket over something Brock said in an interview. Had that not happened, I probably would've walked into the match expecting Brock to win due to a nice combination of blind optimism and cynical pessimism (I had a hunch they may do a rematch - kind of because I couldn't figure out what else Trips would do if he wasn't sitting this Mania [and I assume he wasn't]).

Either way, yes heels can go over at Mania and big situation matches. Yes, during the twist and this match would make a bigger impact. Yes, the build to both of their matches indicate the Trips was winning more than losing. These are all reasons why I don't doubt it's a possibility and could happen. However WWE more often than not don't go in that direction (excluding the impact) and they simply aren't enough to convince me that it's the likely thing to happen. It especially doesn't help when it's so painfully obvious that they are phoning this year in. Anyway, I still think Trips is going to keep wrestling once or twice a year, and that Brock is losing here.