Friday, 12 April 2013

Did WWE Wrestlemania 29 matter?

So another Wrestlemania has come and gone.  But has anything actually changed after the biggest event in the pro wrestling calender?



In years gone by Wrestlemania was seen as the showcase to create new top level superstars but it has to be said that this years event hasn't really done that.

When I first started watching WWE in the early 90s the main event of Wrestlemania was usually the crowning moment of the new top star.  At Wrestlemania X it was Bret Hart, at Wrestlemania XII it was Shawn Micheals and at Wrestlemania XIV it was none other than Stone Cold Steve Austin.  The past two Wrestlemania main events have both been Rock vs. Cena.  Two men who have already achieved top level stardom.  So what was the point?

The first Rock vs. Cena match was something that did benefit the WWE.  It was as big as Hogan vs. Rock in 2002 and created great interest in WWE around the world and in mainstream media.  However it has to be said that this year's main event had no real benefit to the company.  Cena's victory does not move him up the ranks of WWE because he is already their top guy.  If WWE had put any other superstar against The Rock or Cena, a victory for that superstar could have put them to the forefront. Someone like Ryback or Jack Swagger could really benefit from this.



WWE had enough big names at this years Mania to have pushed some new stars.  Instead, we got three main event level matches where all six men competing were already established stars.  The results of Undertaker vs. Punk, Lesnar vs. HHH and Rock vs. Cena are almost irrelevant when it comes to the long term future of the company.

We shall see what stars will rise to the top over the coming months but it looks like WWE missed a trick this year.

AP