A little over a year ago, WWE underwent a seismic organizational shift that most fans thought they’d never see (at least not anytime soon). These changes came in the wake of company CEO Vince McMahon resigning in disgrace after numerous allegations of sexual misconduct (and the company funds he used to keep those transgressions hidden) became known.
Amongst the corporate reshuffling, Paul “Triple H” Levesque took over the day-to-day creative duties. Unfortunately, the McMahon-free era of WWE only lasted roughly six months before the (alleged) sex pest forced his way back into the company, using his power and resources to bypass accountability.
With McMahon back in the fold, he has the final say on creative decisions, but Levesque still handles the everyday booking tasks. During Triple H’s tenure, fans have appreciated the noticeable uptick in the on-screen product’s quality, particularly compared to how bleak things looked right before McMahon’s ousting.
However, Hunter has made his share of mistakes, too, and some of those missteps have been just as glaring as the successes.
In totality, though, what does this say about this version of WWE?
By now, we’ve seen enough of a Triple H-led WWE to discern his strengths and weaknesses. So, that’s what we’ll attempt to do today.
What Triple H has gotten right: Less is more (and the rejuvenation of the secondary championships)
Restoring the credibility of the secondary titles: For the last couple of decades, midcard titles have meant as much to WWE as passing plays mean to a military academy football team. Since Triple H took over creative, though, we have seen a renewed focus on the Intercontinental and United States championships.
GUNTHER’s 412-day (and counting) reign as IC Champion particularly stands out, but even if you ignore his stellar work, WWE under Levesque has made more of an effort to feature the secondary belts in high-profile matches and has avoided booking the champs to take random losses in non-title matches. It’s not perfect (see: Austin Theory) but it’s far better than it used to be.
Following through on advertised matches: It’s a low bar, but it’s one that WWE has failed to hurdle, abusing the “card subject to change” disclaimer to cover for their erratic booking tendencies. Under Triple H, though, the company has improved at delivering what it promised to give.
In the same vein, WWE has also done a better job of booking angles to set up matches that are scheduled for weeks in advance. Yes, WWE still lags behind other promotions in this regard, but it’s refreshing to see the promotion not solely rely on its brand name to draw fans in.
Making the PPVs feel like big events, especially the international ones: While you can nitpick some aspects of the recent WWE pay-per-views, all of them have felt like must-see events. Yes, the locations have played a big role in that, but Triple H and company deserve credit for tailoring the cards to the specific locale (booking Sami Zayn in the Elimination Chamber main event or making Bad Bunny the host of Backlash, for example).
We’ll see if WWE can keep the momentum going with SummerSlam, and we’ll see if the US-based B-shows match their overseas counterparts, but that doesn’t erase the successes the company has enjoyed with these PPVs.
Better patience with pushes/storylines: The Bloodline saga and The Judgment Day’s recent rise is carrying most of the weight here, but it still reflects how much more disciplined the company has become with its storytelling.
Sometimes, that has been to WWE’s detriment (and we’ll discuss that more in a bit), but it’s hard not to look at the popularity of stars like Roman Reigns, Jey Uso, Sami Zayn, Kevin Owens, Sheamus, Seth Rollins Rhea Ripley, and Cody Rhodes and not attribute some of that to the character development that comes from steady storyline progression.
What Triple H has gotten wrong: Missed opportunities and unnecessary title belts
Not striking while the iron was hot with Cody Rhodes (and Drew McIntyre): To be fair, WWE could render this critique moot if it follows through with its plan to have Cody Rhodes beat Roman Reigns at WrestleMania 40, but there’s no guarantee that Reigns or Rhodes will be as over then as they respectively are right now, and if that happens, the decision to not put the Universal Title on Rhodes will feel like an even bigger mistake than it already does.
Since WrestleMania 39, some fans and even Triple H have found plenty of ways to justify Rhodes’ loss — his character needed to experience “adversity” (omitting his bicep injury), it’s Jey Uso’s story, Reigns reaching 1,000 days as champion was more important, it’s merely a chapter in a larger narrative — but it doesn’t change the fact that WWE had a chance to cement “The American Nightmare” as the company’s lead babyface and instead chose HEEEEEEAAAAAAT.
To a lesser degree, WWE made the same mistake with Drew McIntyre at Clash at the Castle. In both cases, the company could’ve solved its absentee champion problem by crowning a hot babyface who could take on all comers. Instead, Triple H picked a worse option…
Introducing a new World Heavyweight Championship: So, WWE’s answer to the part-time titleholder problem was to introduce a consolation world title belt. While Seth Rollins is working hard to get the championship over, it’s going to take more than a couple of midcard PPV matches with Finn Bálor to convince fans that it’s at the same level as Reigns’ championship.
Perhaps WWE sees this as a long-term project, but it’s one that it didn’t need to take on if it put the Universal Title on Rhodes.
Distraction Finishes: Triple H correctly recognized the negative effect that non-finishes have had on the product, limiting the amount of them — even during televised marquee matches — is encouraging. Replacing them with distraction finishes, however, tempers that optimism.
It’s not hard to see the rationale behind these decisions — Triple H clearly sees this as a way to “protect” wrestlers in defeat while setting up future feuds — but constantly using these finishes lessens their overall impact. Plus, it makes the wrestlers who lose clean look weaker by comparison. Hopefully, we see less of them going forward.
The same old stuff (and some returning nonsense): Despite the shift to Triple H, we still see some of the same issues that make WWE a tougher watch than it needs to be. These aren’t major issues, but seeing things like the “promo-interruption-promo-match” format or contract signings stick around is a bit disappointing for anyone for a more seismic shakeup.
Overall thoughts on Triple H as head of creative
Sometimes, it’s okay to just be okay, and that sums up Triple H’s performance over the last year. He has gotten the WWE product to a comfortable spot where the weekly shows aren’t terrible, but also aren’t great. Compared to how bad things were toward the end of McMahon’s first tenure, though, it’s easy to see why fans were quick to praise Levesque when he took over.
The man has his shortcomings, but that’s true for even the best bookers. But given how bleak things looked before (and how they could get again with McMahon back, unfortunately), it’s easy to overlook them, especially when the end result is PPVs like Backlash or Money in the Bank.
As a promotion that favors big personalities (and bigger wrestlers) over high workrate, WWE isn’t going to be for everyone, and that’s perfectly fine. Thankfully, WWE doesn’t monopolize the industry anymore; the proliferation of other promotions means that fans can see the style of wrestling that they want to see without hoping that the biggest one eventually becomes something that it isn’t.
Triple H may not have turned WWE into the best wrestling show, but he has turned it into a better version of itself, and for a lot of fans, that’s more than enough.