Page 200 of 288 FirstFirst ... 100150190196197198199200201202203204210250 ... LastLast
Results 4,976 to 5,000 of 7184

Thread: The Official WWE Thread, Brother!

  1. #4976
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Shuckle View Post
    Well if you really want to generalize... or it could also be because they are consistently pushed or have been around for awhile.
    But they're only "consistently pushed" because of how good they are.

    Do you think John Cena would be around at the top as long as he is if he weren't the best? No, of course not. He's where he is because WWE realizes he's the best. Need to get someone - let's say Edge, RVD, or CM Punk - to that "next level"? Feud them with John Cena. Need to reintroduce The Rock and Brock Lesnar to the WWE? Feud them with John Cena before anyone else. He's the go-to answer for every problem WWE has because of how well he delivers.

    I was talking more about the total package, not just the person who can pander to kids the most and sell the most crappy overpriced merchandise.
    What's wrong with pandering to kids? They're Cena's chief demographic and are the ones making him as popular as he is. Hogan pandered to kids. The Rock panders to nostalgic Attitude Era fans. CM Punk panders to the IWC. Does that make any of them bad? No, it makes them good because only a terrible wrestler would alienate their fanbase.

    And selling merchandise is part of the "total package". In fact, making money and drawing fans to see you is the most important part of being a wrestler, because it's a sign of how entertaining you are (and professional wrestling is entertainment). What good is it for you to excel at anything else if no one wants to watch you do it? As far as the "total package", I've yet to see any area where Punk really tops Cena. Punk is good, but he's not better than Cena.

    The same thing can be said for Cena, otherwise he is just riding off his stale "never give up" good guy garbage.
    As long as his fans (the younger demographic) loves to see Cena doing what he does, then it'd be stupid for him not to do it. The last time a popular act changed his gimmick with no one asking for it (Steve Austin), the results were terrible. "If it ain't broke", and all.

    The difference between what Cena's best known for (pandering to kids) and what Punk's best known for ("Pipebomb!") is that what Cena does doesn't rely on shocking an audience, which means that his act lasts longer.

    Again, Punk is very good on the mic and in the ring, and I'm not trying to say that all he does is lean on the fourth wall, but he's just not as good as Cena is.

    Punk to me is more convincing even without breaking the fourth wall, plus his jokes don't suck. It's rare to see Cena stay in kayfabe, and not have it look lame or tired and even more so to see him tell a joke that doesn't make him look like a D list version of the Rock.
    I would argue this, but the quality of humor is way too subjective for me to get into. But Cena's jokes tend to amuse his audience. His act pisses some of us off, yes, but he's not interested in us, really.

    Again, I can't remember the last time I've been sold by him at all unless he is also seemingly breaking the fourth wall (like with his Rock and Punk feuds) in which case Punk does it better. Cena most of the time has to give us lame jokes and predictable BS (like his latest promo) to sell a storyline. Sure Punk doesn't have a ton to work with outside of his "Pipebomb" antics but like I said to me he is more convincing despite it.
    I can't speak for you, but I do know that Cena's convinced more people in general to pay for him on pay-per-view (WrestleMania 28 & 27, One Night Stand 2006, Extreme Rules 2012, etc.) and tune in to see him on Raw than Punk has. The "lame jokes and predictable BS" work, and they've sold more than Punk's "pipebomb" shtick. Which would make him more convincing one by default.

    So when Punk was going mic to mic with the Rock only several weeks ago you were more excited about Cena's terrible jokes and predictable Rumble aspirations?
    Of course not. I loved the Rock vs. Punk feud, and was surprised with the chemistry the two of them had on the mic. They told a very enjoyable story in just the three weeks leading up to the Rumble. But that's part of what I'm saying here. Punk is only at his best when working with talent (Rock, Cena) who have a record of putting on excellent angles and selling shows successfully with a variety of different talent.

    Also I don't think it's fair to exclude Punk's feud with Cena and Rock when the former was his single biggest feud and the latter he is still going at it with.
    That's exactly the reasoning. Punk's biggest feud was undisputedly with John Cena. And part of the reason for that was because of Cena. Meanwhile, if you had to ask what was Cena's biggest feud you'd have several different choices: The Rock, HHH, HBK, Batista, Edge, Lesnar, JBL, Punk, Umaga, RVD... the list goes on. And you could make a great case for most of them.

    That's how good Cena is, and how far ahead of Punk he is.

    Quote Originally Posted by -Raiga- View Post
    I completely disagree. His last few promos have been good, but lets face it, he doesn't even have a character other then "generic heel". Compare that to a cult leader with obvious ego problems, ...well, there is no comparison. Heck, I'd rate his promo against Rey's daughter one of the best promos of all time.

    Much less I don't get how they are forgettable feuds, I can remember every aspect of each feud(I loved the scott armstrong stuff with undertaker, was pretty funny), meanwhile I honestly couldn't tell you who was in the main event of whatever PPV 2 months ago.
    Punk's character now (or at least up until the Rumble) was the insecure WWE Champion who felt slighted by WWE and the fans, and who felt he had to prove he was the "Best in the World" by demanding respect from everyone he came into contact with. It wasn't as much an obvious gimmick as SES, but it was a character.

    As far as the second point, I said those feuds were forgettable because, honestly, there's been absolutely very little talk of any of them after they ended. When I hear people talk about the highlights of Punk's career, I usually hear about his ECW title run, cashing in Money in the Bank on Edge, feud with Jeff Hardy, the feud with John Cena. You never really hear about much of SES aside from the gimmick itself. None of those feuds really ended up accomplishing much for Punk.

  2. #4977
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Some type of hell
    Posts
    818

    Default

    ^you can throw these facts ans figures into the discussion, but cena is lucky that wwe is PG. there used to be a time when that wasn't the case, and you best believe punk would be way more successful than cena. my point is, you keep saying he's more popular, and that's why. but cm punk is better than cena. cm punk can wrestle better than him. I've said already that punk is my favorite, and if he weren't as a good a wrestler as he is then this wouldn't be the case. that's also why i really liked the punk/D. Bryan feud, because it was the battle of the technicians. and like laser shuckle said, punk doesn't need to lean on the 4th wall to have a good promo. maybe cena sells more because lots of kids beg their parents to go to PPVs and buy his merchandise. ever considered that? other wise cena's promos are okay/decent. it's very predictable. meanwhile, even though punk is the "generic heel", he does a good job performing it in his promo. that recent one he did about facts vs. opinion was great. he started by naming facts about his career and opinions of the rock and the royal rumble and tied it very well with saying how him beating the rock was a fact. i know that's been done before, but he still sells it. even the way he says "that's a FACT!" is very well done. and that's something cena can't do because he starts losing his voice when he gets into his promo. I mean, you can't possibly believe that cena makes better promos than cm punk. and about feuds, punk has been in the semi-spotlight for only 1 year. not to mention that for the past year, he was 2nd fiddle for the first half of 2012 and then generic heel for the second half. and you'd probably say that's because cena is better so wwe puts him in the spotlight, but i disagree. i think it's because cena is the wwe's white knight so they WANT him over punk to keep the strong child audience existent. if they had kept punk's momentum, then he would have been the biggest guy, but he's also to difficult to control, as opposed to cena, who is the wwe's good little money maker. basically, punk can wrestle, do promos, and be entertaining better than cena

    A New World Order: Birth of a Prophecy

    Credit to Brutaka

  3. #4978
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    594

    Default

    So I was watching WWE main event on Wednesday night, and Tensai got the biggest reaction since the A-Train and Albert chants almost 1 year ago. After such a lousy booking and re-introduction being shot to the moon. This might be the thing to get Tensai back over with the crowd if he teams with Brodus for a while. I was actually hoping for a feud between the two, months ago hoping it would do both good, but WWE had missed the boat on it. The thing is that the crowd was truly into it. This is how much crowd involvement is to getting superstars over.

    All we need is some rock, then we'd have a stable of hip hop funk n' rock~ lgi WWE do it!
    Thanks, to the awesome artist of our clan, Team Nightmare, zek4040 for this AMAZING banner.



    Leader of Pokemon Online's Scripted Server Tournaments channel

    Pokemon Online is now on Android: http://pokemon-online.eu/pages/download/

  4. #4979
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flamebeam View Post
    ^you can throw these facts ans figures into the discussion, but cena is lucky that wwe is PG. there used to be a time when that wasn't the case, and you best believe punk would be way more successful than cena.
    Ignoring for a moment that WWE has been rated PG for most of its history (the Attitude Era was the exception, not the rule), Cena's success began in 2003. He became one of the top merchandise sellers in 2004. He won the WWE Championship in 2005 and became the company's undisputed representative by the end of 2006. All this while WWE was still rated TV-14. So Cena was able to draw with an edgier audience as well as a younger one. The point being that talent is talent. It doesn't matter what time period you're in.

    my point is, you keep saying he's more popular, and that's why. but cm punk is better than cena.
    But if CM Punk were better than Cena was, he'd be the more popular one, wouldn't he? Wrestling isn't real. You can't judge the merits of a guy by the way he pretends to fight, because that makes no sense. You have to judge his ability to entertain fans. And Cena's popularity is indicative of how entertaining he is.

    cm punk can wrestle better than him. I've said already that punk is my favorite, and if he weren't as a good a wrestler as he is then this wouldn't be the case. that's also why i really liked the punk/D. Bryan feud, because it was the battle of the technicians.
    Punk is a very good wrestler, and I'd never say otherwise. I get why he has his fans. But he's not better than Cena, not in the ring or on the mic. A crowd is usually hotter for a Cena match than a Punk match, they get far more into the stories he tells, and the focus is usually all on him ("Let's Go Cena/Cena Sucks!").

    It speaks volumes that if you asked most people what CM Punk's best WWE match was, most of them would point to Money in the Bank. Meanwhile, with Cena, there's not only that, but Raw 2007 (vs. Shawn Michaels), ONS '06 (vs. RVD), Unforgiven '06 (vs. Edge), RR '07 (vs. Umaga), WM22 (vs. Triple H), SS '08 (vs. Batista), and many more.

    And here's the funny thing about the Punk-Bryan feud. While the matches were good, the talking point of that story wasn't Punk. It was AJ who got all the attention and it was AJ who everyone was focused on, despite her not even wrestling. Would that ever happen with Cena? No. Cena's too good for anyone's attention to be anywhere else but on him.

    Even at WrestleMania 28, when it was Rock vs. Cena in The Rock's hometown (not to mention his first singles match in nearly a decade) and you'd think all the attention would be on him, what was one of the biggest chants that evening? "Let's Go Cena/Cena Sucks".

    and like laser shuckle said, punk doesn't need to lean on the 4th wall to have a good promo.
    Neither does Cena. He's had plenty of good promos where he stayed completely in character without needing to "wink" at the audience a bit.

    And I wasn't saying Punk needed to lean on the 4th wall to have a good promo (Raiga mentioned the one against Mysterio's daughter, and that was entirely in character), but that's what his most celebrated and "genuine" promos tend to be. The ones set to catch the attention of fans who are more interested in that side of wrestling.

    maybe cena sells more because lots of kids beg their parents to go to PPVs and buy his merchandise. ever considered that? other wise cena's promos are okay/decent. it's very predictable.
    And Punk's promos aren't predictable? Here's a rundown of almost every Punk promo since his heel turn:

    - "I have been champion for ______ days."
    - "I deserve your respect."
    - "You people..."
    - "I am the Best in the World."
    - *rundown of legends who couldn't hold the title as long as he could*

    And even in the vaulted SES days, almost all of Punk's promos would be geared to how much better he is than the audience and his opponent because of his Straight Edge lifestyle.

    The truth is just like every wrestler will have signature moves that tend to pop in every match they wrestle, every great mic worker has catchphrases or things that they repeat. Rock, Foley, Jericho, Austin, Hogan, Undertaker, DX, etc. were all repetitive in their mic work and if you watch anyone long enough, you'll begin to see the patterns. Cena isn't unique in that.

    And yes, I have considered that Cena sells because kids get their parents to buy stuff. Most kids merchandise is sold that way (unless you really think Middle/Elementary School children are going to be able to pay $30 for t-shirts or $50 for pay-per-views). I don't see how it really changes the point.

    i think it's because cena is the wwe's white knight so they WANT him over punk to keep the strong child audience existent. if they had kept punk's momentum, then he would have been the biggest guy, but he's also to difficult to control, as opposed to cena, who is the wwe's good little money maker.
    I don't think so. WWE always goes with what makes them money. They would never intentionally sabotage a guy's run if they thought it would make them money.

    They bent over backwards for CM Punk. When (according to Punk himself) his new contract wasn't even signed until that night in Chicago, they allowed him to cut vicious promos against Vince (the company's owner), Cena (the company's representative), Triple H (one of the most protected guys I know of), and The Rock (the returning legend who was primed to make WWE huge amounts of money). No one else got those privileges. Punk got to drag up Triple H's backstage past with the Kliq. He got to come out and say, in so many words, that "WWE sucks and it's time for a change". And then he got to beat Cena twice. And then he held the title for 434 days. If they really didn't want Punk at the top, they would not have allowed him to do all of that.

    If WWE still didn't have faith in Punk to make more money than Cena despite all of that, that's not WWE's doing. Either Punk wasn't making that much money, or Cena was still making more.

    basically, punk can wrestle, do promos, and be entertaining better than cena
    But if Cena entertains more people than Punk, draws an audience into the stories he tells in the ring, and gets greater reactions than Punk on the mic, then how could Punk possibly be better?

  5. #4980
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    Should've known better than to ask for another wall of text from you...

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    But they're only "consistently pushed" because of how good they are.
    Was Sheamus pushed for his first title run because of how good he is over the rest of the roster? what about Ryback's big push? he barely gets any reaction most of the time (take this week's Raw, in his hometown no less) granted the consistency is questionable, but still. Since when did that become an absolute in wrestling?

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Do you think John Cena would be around at the top as long as he is if he weren't the best? No, of course not. He's where he is because WWE realizes he's the best. Need to get someone - let's say Edge, RVD, or CM Punk - to that "next level"? Feud them with John Cena. Need to reintroduce The Rock and Brock Lesnar to the WWE? Feud them with John Cena before anyone else. He's the go-to answer for every problem WWE has because of how well he delivers.
    Do you have some kind of WWE brand marketing booklet from where you're getting all this from? Yes I know, he's got the biggest audience. That doesn't make him the best. And I know you're gonna tell me that being popular does make him the best along with selling merchandise, blah blah and I will disagree with you there again because it happens to be subjective.


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    What's wrong with pandering to kids? They're Cena's chief demographic and are the ones making him as popular as he is. Hogan pandered to kids. The Rock panders to nostalgic Attitude Era fans. CM Punk panders to the IWC. Does that make any of them bad? No, it makes them good because only a terrible wrestler would alienate their fanbase.
    Hogan pandered only to kids? this I did not know. The obvious problem I have with it is that's his chief demographic and he's supposed to be the face of the company. I don't get why you would want your best guy in a show where people essentially beat each other up to be catering to kids. But that's just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    And selling merchandise is part of the "total package". In fact, making money and drawing fans to see you is the most important part of being a wrestler, because it's a sign of how entertaining you are (and professional wrestling is entertainment). What good is it for you to excel at anything else if no one wants to watch you do it? As far as the "total package", I've yet to see any area where Punk really tops Cena. Punk is good, but he's not better than Cena.
    Serious? you think he's better in the ring and on the mic? What about his lame gear and theme song? To each his own I guess. I was hoping for more than just a by the book reading on how WWE operates.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    As long as his fans (the younger demographic) loves to see Cena doing what he does, then it'd be stupid for him not to do it. The last time a popular act changed his gimmick with no one asking for it (Steve Austin), the results were terrible. "If it ain't broke", and all.
    If all he wants to do is water himself down for the kids then more power to him. My issue is having someone like that who is only there for a certain audience headlining the show. Although it does make for good TV when they pair him up with someone on the opposite end like Punk or Rock.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    The difference between what Cena's best known for (pandering to kids) and what Punk's best known for ("Pipebomb!") is that what Cena does doesn't rely on shocking an audience, which means that his act lasts longer.
    Well that's nifty considering his act has been around longer. Of course when your target audience is kids you don't exactly have the same high expectations to meet.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    I would argue this, but the quality of humor is way too subjective for me to get into. But Cena's jokes tend to amuse his audience. His act pisses some of us off, yes, but he's not interested in us, really.
    So then how much sense really does it make to have him as their top guy?


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    I can't speak for you, but I do know that Cena's convinced more people in general to pay for him on pay-per-view (WrestleMania 28 & 27, One Night Stand 2006, Extreme Rules 2012, etc.) and tune in to see him on Raw than Punk has. The "lame jokes and predictable BS" work, and they've sold more than Punk's "pipebomb" shtick. Which would make him more convincing one by default.
    That's hardly fair considering most of those events can be attributed to Rock and Lesnar as far as buyrates, and the comment you quoted still stands since he wasn't messing around as much as usual against those guys. And it's not just how many you convince, but who you convince.


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Of course not. I loved the Rock vs. Punk feud, and was surprised with the chemistry the two of them had on the mic. They told a very enjoyable story in just the three weeks leading up to the Rumble. But that's part of what I'm saying here. Punk is only at his best when working with talent (Rock, Cena) who have a record of putting on excellent angles and selling shows successfully with a variety of different talent.
    How exactly is that a knock on Punk? Those guys have been around for longer too. And it sounds like you might have missed this week's Raw because Rock vs Punk is still going even though it will probably get thrown under the bus quickly for Twice in a Lifetime.


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    That's exactly the reasoning. Punk's biggest feud was undisputedly with John Cena. And part of the reason for that was because of Cena. Meanwhile, if you had to ask what was Cena's biggest feud you'd have several different choices: The Rock, HHH, HBK, Batista, Edge, Lesnar, JBL, Punk, Umaga, RVD... the list goes on. And you could make a great case for most of them.

    That's how good Cena is, and how far ahead of Punk he is.
    So he's been around longer. Pretty much twice as long. Does that make the person who's been around the longest or has had the most memorable feuds the best? I imagine it's pretty easy to look down on the current talent like that when they haven't had the time or the chances seasoned guys like Cena have had.

    At the end of the day, I'm still not sold on Cena. I don't care if half the U.S. was tuning in to the show and cheering him on or about his numerous accolades. I watch his segments and matches because they are almost always held above the rest of the roster; not because I like his character, his ability to kick out of multiple wrestler's finishers at once or watching him drop his fist a foot away from his opponent's head while the camera cuts to the other side of the ring.
    Last edited by Laser Shuckle; 2nd February 2013 at 9:29 PM.

  6. #4981
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fond du lac, wisconsin
    Posts
    2,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Punk's character now (or at least up until the Rumble) was the insecure WWE Champion who felt slighted by WWE and the fans, and who felt he had to prove he was the "Best in the World" by demanding respect from everyone he came into contact with. It wasn't as much an obvious gimmick as SES, but it was a character.
    Well, put it this way, he has a character but its just incredibly generic. Even Cena exclaimed after punk's heel turn "I never took you as another guy to say 'I demand respect'".

    Anyways, guys, take er' easy on the text. Cena is stale, but he's popular. That's all that needs to be said, no walls of text necessary.
    ----------------------------------

  7. #4982
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Re: the text walls...

    I know it's a lot to read, but when someone makes a lot of statements that you want to respond to, it's naturally going to take a lot of words to make that response and then back up your points with a reasoning that makes sense. In the last couple posts, I was responding to a bunch of things, and it's difficult to make a reply without getting long-winded.

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Shuckle View Post
    Was Sheamus pushed for his first title run because of how good he is over the rest of the roster? what about Ryback's big push? he barely gets any reaction most of the time (take this week's Raw, in his hometown no less) granted the consistency is questionable, but still. Since when did that become an absolute in wrestling?
    I wasn't watching WWE when Sheamus became champion for the first time, so I can't give a fair answer for that, but there are always exceptions to any rule. Sometimes WWE sees something in a guy that makes them think he'll become big right away with a push, or they just want to surprise fans with a big storyline twist. But you'll notice that if it doesn't work out, that person is usually depushed rather quickly, and it didn't take long for Sheamus to lose the title. John Cena became WWE Champion in 2005, almost ten years ago, and has stayed at the top ever since. There's a big difference between him and Sheamus and Ryback.

    Do you have some kind of WWE brand marketing booklet from where you're getting all this from? Yes I know, he's got the biggest audience. That doesn't make him the best. And I know you're gonna tell me that being popular does make him the best along with selling merchandise, blah blah and I will disagree with you there again because it happens to be subjective.
    So let me get this straight... in an entertainment business, the guy who's the most entertaining isn't the best? You might argue that someone like CM Punk is more athletic or technically sound, and that is subjective, but professional wrestling isn't about that. It's theater. It's about who can put the most eyes on the product and sell the most tickets. If John Cena does that the best (not counting The Rock or Brock Lesnar, since they're not full time), then he's the best WWE has.

    Hogan pandered only to kids? this I did not know. The obvious problem I have with it is that's his chief demographic and he's supposed to be the face of the company. I don't get why you would want your best guy in a show where people essentially beat each other up to be catering to kids. But that's just me.
    Hogan was the guy who used to say, "say your prayers and eat your vitamins". His character starred in an '80s children's cartoon, Hulk Hogan's Rock 'N Wrestling. He referred to his fans as "little Hulkamaniacs". He was a live-action superhero and children loved him.

    And this was during a time when pro wrestling was at the highest point in its history. Wrestling was never more successful than when it was promoted to kids (the successes of the late 1990s could never have happened without the children from the Hulkamania period). And the thing about kids is, not only do you get their parents' money now, but because children are impressionable, by hooking them now you make sure they're still a part of your audience 10-15 years from now. And they can introduce their children to wrestling, and the cycle continues. It makes a lot of sense for WWE to market to them.

    By putting out John Cena, a hero who children love, not only are they making money off their top guy, but WWE is also building their next audience in the future. Since children love Cena, they can become hooked on the product now and hopefully will stay hooked years from now.

    Serious? you think he's better in the ring and on the mic? What about his lame gear and theme song? To each his own I guess. I was hoping for more than just a by the book reading on how WWE operates.
    What were you hoping for? I think Cena tends to tell better stories in the ring and that his matches engage more emotion from fans than Punk's matches do, for the most part. I think Cena's had more great matches in WWE than CM Punk has, with a wider variety of opponents than Punk has. I've never seen a Punk match - other than perhaps the one he had with Cena - that's better than Cena's stuff against Edge (Unforgiven '06), Shawn Michaels (Raw '07), Lesnar (Extreme Rules '12), or Umaga (Royal Rumble '07). The mic is a harder area to judge, but yes, I think Cena's overall cut better promos in his career as well.

    That's hardly fair considering most of those events can be attributed to Rock and Lesnar as far as buyrates, and the comment you quoted still stands since he wasn't messing around as much as usual against those guys. And it's not just how many you convince, but who you convince.
    Rock and Lesnar do deserve a lot of the credit, but neither of them would get those numbers if fans didn't want to see them destroy Cena (who, in his match with Rock, took up the position of the heel). So he should get credit, too. And they're really not the only examples I could have used. Raw's ratings, live attendance, merchandise sales, and pay-per-view buys on the whole went up in 2005 and 2006, when Cena came to the show and became its focus. Yes, he's very convincing even without Rock or Brock.

    How exactly is that a knock on Punk? Those guys have been around for longer too. And it sounds like you might have missed this week's Raw because Rock vs Punk is still going even though it will probably get thrown under the bus quickly for Twice in a Lifetime.
    It's not meant to be a knock on Punk. I'm just wondering if he can do what Cena (and The Rock) can, and actually accomplish the same things with people who aren't as great as Cena and Rock are.

    So he's been around longer. Pretty much twice as long. Does that make the person who's been around the longest or has had the most memorable feuds the best? I imagine it's pretty easy to look down on the current talent like that when they haven't had the time or the chances seasoned guys like Cena have had.
    I'm not looking down on anybody, I'm saying that right now no one is as good as Cena is. Could that change with more time? Of course. But I can't tell the future, I can only speak for the present. And in the present, I believe that John Cena is the best full-time wrestler WWE has, for the reasons presented above.

    At the end of the day, I'm still not sold on Cena. I don't care if half the U.S. was tuning in to the show and cheering him on or about his numerous accolades. I watch his segments and matches because they are almost always held above the rest of the roster; not because I like his character, his ability to kick out of multiple wrestler's finishers at once or watching him drop his fist a foot away from his opponent's head while the camera cuts to the other side of the ring.
    Not sure why you think I'm trying to "sell" you on Cena. I'm just explaining to you why I believe he's the best today, why he's at the top of WWE and why they continue to push him, and why it's a good idea to do so. I'm a fan of Cena, but I understand not everyone's going to feel the same way.
    Last edited by charizardfan; 3rd February 2013 at 3:15 PM.

  8. #4983
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Some type of hell
    Posts
    818

    Default

    ^once again to lazy to quote the whole thing, but there were 2 things you said and stuck out

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan
    I think Cena tends to tell better stories in the ring and that his matches engage more emotion from fans than Punk's matches do, for the most part.
    that's what you think. i think cm punk tells better stories. maybe he's generic now, but that's because, for the past 6 months, the wwe writers have been writing him that way. imo, for being written as a generic heel, cm punk has done a good job with the overdone role. but don't forget about cm punk in the end of 2011. if the wwe let him be himself, sometimes a face and sometimes a heel, i think he can be just as popular as cena. again, this is imo. i like that cm punk leans on the 4th wall occasionally. let's face the truth: wwe isn't real. john cena and the roster are not leonardo dicaprio or brad pitt when it comes to acting. they can sell it to some point, but i know it's not real. cm punk doesn't hide that fact when he attacks the system of wwe. he talks about fan reactions work and how easy they are to manipulate and he talks about the rock and his bag of tricks and vince and all that, and I like that. i like when the line between truth and fake is blurred. and i like his wrestling style. if i didn't, then i wouldn't like him. it's also why i like daniel bryan and john morrison. cena's style isn't as boring as triple h's, but it's not as good, imo, as punk's. according to you, people get more into cena’s matches because of his storylines. i get into punk's matches more because i like to see him fight. on the other hand, i stop paying attention to cena's matches midway and then start near the end. again, it's all imo, but I'm simply explaining why i like cm punk

    I'm a fan of Cena, but I understand not everyone's going to feel the same way.
    I'm a fan of cena, too. i like that he's incorruptible babyface. he's the guy we can count on to be the good guy. he has had an impressive 10+ years in the wwe, with many rivalries and amazing victories and defeats and such. and he's a good person at heart. most people over a certain age seem to hate him, and i don't see why that hatred is so strong, because i personally like him. but i still prefer cm punk any day.

    and because this was all opinion, I'm not expecting a tsunami-wall of text

    A New World Order: Birth of a Prophecy

    Credit to Brutaka

  9. #4984
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Re: the text walls...

    I know it's a lot to read, but when someone makes a lot of statements that you want to respond to, it's naturally going to take a lot of words to make that response and then back up your points with a reasoning that makes sense. In the last couple posts, I was responding to a bunch of things, and it's difficult to make a reply without getting long-winded.
    Lol, I think he knows. now look what you've done. Then again I'm not much better...

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    I wasn't watching WWE when Sheamus became champion for the first time, so I can't give a fair answer for that, but there are always exceptions to any rule. Sometimes WWE sees something in a guy that makes them think he'll become big right away with a push, or they just want to surprise fans with a big storyline twist. But you'll notice that if it doesn't work out, that person is usually depushed rather quickly, and it didn't take long for Sheamus to lose the title. John Cena became WWE Champion in 2005, almost ten years ago, and has stayed at the top ever since. There's a big difference between him and Sheamus and Ryback.
    I'll give you this one.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    So let me get this straight... in an entertainment business, the guy who's the most entertaining isn't the best? You might argue that someone like CM Punk is more athletic or technically sound, and that is subjective, but professional wrestling isn't about that. It's theater. It's about who can put the most eyes on the product and sell the most tickets. If John Cena does that the best (not counting The Rock or Brock Lesnar, since they're not full time), then he's the best WWE has.
    Maybe you think he's the most entertaining along with the rest of his fans, that just means he entertains the most not that he's the most entertaining. I don't think selling the most tickets makes someone the best overall. And you're really going to generalize and say wrestling isn't about athleticism? Who do you enjoy watching more in the ring: Great Khali or Daniel Bryan?

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Hogan was the guy who used to say, "say your prayers and eat your vitamins". His character starred in an '80s children's cartoon, Hulk Hogan's Rock 'N Wrestling. He referred to his fans as "little Hulkamaniacs". He was a live-action superhero and children loved him.

    And this was during a time when pro wrestling was at the highest point in its history. Wrestling was never more successful than when it was promoted to kids (the successes of the late 1990s could never have happened without the children from the Hulkamania period). And the thing about kids is, not only do you get their parents' money now, but because children are impressionable, by hooking them now you make sure they're still a part of your audience 10-15 years from now. And they can introduce their children to wrestling, and the cycle continues. It makes a lot of sense for WWE to market to them.

    By putting out John Cena, a hero who children love, not only are they making money off their top guy, but WWE is also building their next audience in the future. Since children love Cena, they can become hooked on the product now and hopefully will stay hooked years from now.
    Meanwhile they help to alienate the rest of their fan base, a.k.a the ones who actually know better. But I guess trying to appeal to both sides is too much to ask for from them when they are charging 45 bucks every month to watch a still very adult oriented show with a children's character in the main event.

    Also Cena is no Hulk Hogan. This is a different era. recycling the same routine has gotten very old for a lot of people. But I guess it's fine because he sells...

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    What were you hoping for? I think Cena tends to tell better stories in the ring and that his matches engage more emotion from fans than Punk's matches do, for the most part. I think Cena's had more great matches in WWE than CM Punk has, with a wider variety of opponents than Punk has. I've never seen a Punk match - other than perhaps the one he had with Cena - that's better than Cena's stuff against Edge (Unforgiven '06), Shawn Michaels (Raw '07), Lesnar (Extreme Rules '12), or Umaga (Royal Rumble '07). The mic is a harder area to judge, but yes, I think Cena's overall cut better promos in his career as well.
    I can't argue with opinion and I've watched him less than you have, but Cena has had more time to build his fan base, wrestle matches and cut promos. Personally I've still always liked Punk more and find him more entertaining.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Rock and Lesnar do deserve a lot of the credit, but neither of them would get those numbers if fans didn't want to see them destroy Cena (who, in his match with Rock, took up the position of the heel). So he should get credit, too. And they're really not the only examples I could have used. Raw's ratings, live attendance, merchandise sales, and pay-per-view buys on the whole went up in 2005 and 2006, when Cena came to the show and became its focus. Yes, he's very convincing even without Rock or Brock.
    I imagine that's because he's so unconvincing at being a convincing good guy, if that makes any sense. McDonalds has convinced millions of people to buy their food, that doesn't make it good.


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    It's not meant to be a knock on Punk. I'm just wondering if he can do what Cena (and The Rock) can, and actually accomplish the same things with people who aren't as great as Cena and Rock are.
    I suppose time will have to tell because he definitely hasn't had the same ridiculously generous booking and amount of time with WWE.
    Last edited by Laser Shuckle; 4th February 2013 at 5:19 AM.

  10. #4985
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Shuckle View Post
    Maybe you think he's the most entertaining along with the rest of his fans, that just means he entertains the most not that he's the most entertaining. I don't think selling the most tickets makes someone the best overall.
    But as I keep coming back to, the talents of a wrestler is based on how many people he can entertain. Because wrestling is about drawing fans and making money. So if John Cena does that the best today (which we can assume based on the fact that WWE still uses him as the face of their company), then he must be the most talented, by definition of what makes a great pro wrestler.

    And you're really going to generalize and say wrestling isn't about athleticism? Who do you enjoy watching more in the ring: Great Khali or Daniel Bryan?
    Daniel Bryan is more entertaining than Khali is. Bryan has demonstrated the ability to become popular with fans, he can draw fans into his matches, he can sell, and his psychology is good. He can do all of that better than Khali can. If all Bryan had going for him was athleticism, he'd be awful, but that's obviously not the case. Athleticism can certainly help, not saying otherwise, but it's not the end all of wrestling. In the end, what matters is if one can entertain and make fans want to see them win or lose. Look at The Undertaker at WrestleMania 28. He's far from athletic and can't really fly around the ring, but he and Triple H were still able to wrestle a fantastic match.

    Athleticism does not equal great wrestling on its own (neither does technical wrestling, for that matter).

    Meanwhile they help to alienate the rest of their fan base, a.k.a the ones who actually know better. But I guess trying to appeal to both sides is too much to ask for from them when they are charging 45 bucks every month to watch a still very adult oriented show with a children's character in the main event.

    Also Cena is no Hulk Hogan. This is a different era. recycling the same routine has gotten very old for a lot of people. But I guess it's fine because he sells...
    No, Cena isn't Hogan (neither are Rock or Austin, for that matter), but the logic is still sound. Other entertainment franchises do the same (would the Transformers movies be so successful without the audience that watched the cartoon in the '80s?). The tobacco industry has made millions with the same principle: market to younger people now, build a loyal customer base in the future.

    WWE doesn't try to alienate anyone (the show is rated TV-PG and guys like Rock, Brock, Punk, Orton, etc. are to appeal to the non-Cena demographics of the WWE fanbase), but you have to understand that children are important in a way that older groups can't be. The Attitude Era was marketed primarily to older audiences, and the fallout once those audiences eventually left (after only 3 years) was disastrous.

    I can't argue with opinion and I've watched him less than you have, but Cena has had more time to build his fan base, wrestle matches and cut promos. Personally I've still always liked Punk more and find him more entertaining.
    If you find Punk more entertaining, that's up to you and I would never question that, but that doesn't change that Cena is still better at doing his job (entertaining) than Punk is.

    I imagine that's because he's so unconvincing at being a convincing good guy, if that makes any sense. McDonalds has convinced millions of people to buy their food, that doesn't make it good.
    Actually, Cena is convincing at playing both the good guy and the bad guy and people have paid to see him operate in both elements. And there's a world of difference between brands of restaurants (McDonald's has several advantages over other restaurant chains: it's easily available and widespread, television advertising, the Dollar Menu, etc.) and professional wrestling.

    Also, on a completely unrelated note - shame on you for trashing McDonald's. Their breakfast menu is a wonderful thing.

    I suppose time will have to tell because he definitely hasn't had the same ridiculously generous booking and amount of time with WWE.
    CM Punk has had some very generous booking. I've already outlined all that he's been given over the past couple years, but even before that he was still a prominent fixture on Raw working with top talent. This idea of Punk not being given opportunities is a myth.

  11. #4986
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fond du lac, wisconsin
    Posts
    2,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Re: the text walls...

    I know it's a lot to read, but when someone makes a lot of statements that you want to respond to, it's naturally going to take a lot of words to make that response and then back up your points with a reasoning that makes sense. In the last couple posts, I was responding to a bunch of things, and it's difficult to make a reply without getting long-winded.
    No worries, you and I were the innovators of the wall-of-text discussions in this thread remember?

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    But as I keep coming back to, the talents of a wrestler is based on how many people he can entertain. Because wrestling is about drawing fans and making money. So if John Cena does that the best today (which we can assume based on the fact that WWE still uses him as the face of their company), then he must be the most talented, by definition of what makes a great pro wrestler.
    I think what laser shuckle was getting at was that there is a certain point when they are pushing Cena so much he's hurting other's ability to try to entertain. As in, WWE expects a diamond in the rough to show up, but they keep checking the same dirt(cena) expecting it to yield drastically different results. Even when someone does make it make it on to their radar, like ryback/ryder/funkasaurus, they let it go to waste. Or ironically, feed them to cena storyline-wise, like ryder/ryback in this case.
    ----------------------------------

  12. #4987
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Somewhere green
    Posts
    7,269

    Default

    Sorry to break up the conversation of whatever you guys are talking about but we had a new RAW last night. It was alright...I guess. I only really cared for Mark Henry and Jack Swagger being back. Swagger returned last Smackdown, and continued over to RAW. CM Punk still calls himself the champ, he might as well be. I mean Rock wasn't even there last night so Cena and Punk despite not being champions are still the main event guys who wrestle on TV. The matches of the night were alright. Kane and Daniel Bryan are starting to fight among themselves again, could this possibly mean they'll lose the belts soon to a team like Mysterio and Sin Cara? I think Orton had another match against Wade Barret. I don't remember, I've seen them wrestle so many times now it's hard to keep track. Miz TV was meh until Brock Lesnar came out and destroyed everything. Brock Lesnar was here but the WWE Champion wasn't? It was good to see Lesnar and I figured they won't build Triple H vs Brock Lesnar II until a little later, so there was no build up to that as all. Also was Dolph Ziggler on last night? I didn't get to see all of RAW so I didn't get to if he had a match or if he was even on.

    I did enjoy CM Punk vs Chris Jericho though. Two of my faves going at it is always nice. The ending to RAW was again, meh. I hope by the end of Wrestlemania they end the Shield. These guys probably have a future in WWE as there own guys but as a group like the Shield they are boring and I simply do not care for them. I can see at mania Sheamus, Ryback and maybe Randy Orton teaming up to battle the Shield. So overall RAW was just average like always. I was surprised that Rock didn't even send a satellite video since he's suppose to be our WWE Champion and this is suppose to be a new era. Feels a lot like the old one to me.

    Oh yeah Big Show and Del Rio's feud contiunes as well. I'm starting to like ADR as a face. It's different but so far I have no complaints on it. It also seems like Rhodes Schoolars broke up. To bad they never won the tag belts before doing so.
    Parena or Serecham both equal Serena+Pancham!

  13. #4988
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Some type of hell
    Posts
    818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Platinum fan. View Post
    Sorry to break up the conversation of whatever you guys are talking about but we had a new RAW last night. It was alright...I guess. I only really cared for Mark Henry and Jack Swagger being back. Swagger returned last Smackdown, and continued over to RAW. CM Punk still calls himself the champ, he might as well be. I mean Rock wasn't even there last night so Cena and Punk despite not being champions are still the main event guys who wrestle on TV. The matches of the night were alright. Kane and Daniel Bryan are starting to fight among themselves again, could this possibly mean they'll lose the belts soon to a team like Mysterio and Sin Cara? I think Orton had another match against Wade Barret. I don't remember, I've seen them wrestle so many times now it's hard to keep track. Miz TV was meh until Brock Lesnar came out and destroyed everything. Brock Lesnar was here but the WWE Champion wasn't? It was good to see Lesnar and I figured they won't build Triple H vs Brock Lesnar II until a little later, so there was no build up to that as all. Also was Dolph Ziggler on last night? I didn't get to see all of RAW so I didn't get to if he had a match or if he was even on.

    I did enjoy CM Punk vs Chris Jericho though. Two of my faves going at it is always nice. The ending to RAW was again, meh. I hope by the end of Wrestlemania they end the Shield. These guys probably have a future in WWE as there own guys but as a group like the Shield they are boring and I simply do not care for them. I can see at mania Sheamus, Ryback and maybe Randy Orton teaming up to battle the Shield. So overall RAW was just average like always. I was surprised that Rock didn't even send a satellite video since he's suppose to be our WWE Champion and this is suppose to be a new era. Feels a lot like the old one to me.

    Oh yeah Big Show and Del Rio's feud contiunes as well. I'm starting to like ADR as a face. It's different but so far I have no complaints on it. It also seems like Rhodes Schoolars broke up. To bad they never won the tag belts before doing so.
    i didn't watch much of raw last night (studying for exams), but i did see the thing between d. bryan and kane. i really hope wwe isn't so predictable that they would break team hell no up and pit them against each other in wrestlemania. and if it's true what you said about rhode scholars, then i am so confused as to what wwe is doing about the tag division, which they were supposed to be trying to improve. i think they need more writers that specialize in the tag team and diva's divisions because they have reached such low points. i guess they're preoccupied with rock, lesnar, hhh, undertaker, and the world titles, but they gotta learn how to balance their effort between all that their roster has to offer

    A New World Order: Birth of a Prophecy

    Credit to Brutaka

  14. #4989
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -Raiga- View Post
    I think what laser shuckle was getting at was that there is a certain point when they are pushing Cena so much he's hurting other's ability to try to entertain. As in, WWE expects a diamond in the rough to show up, but they keep checking the same dirt(cena) expecting it to yield drastically different results. Even when someone does make it make it on to their radar, like ryback/ryder/funkasaurus, they let it go to waste. Or ironically, feed them to cena storyline-wise, like ryder/ryback in this case.
    Now that I can understand, to an extent. It's a balancing act. On one hand, you want to give your audiences the guys that they tune in/pay for (hence the continued pushing of Cena), otherwise they're not going to want to come back. On the other hand, you want your other guys in prominent spots so that when Cena does inevitably go, or stops making money, there's someone waiting in the wings who can replace him. WWE doesn't always nail it (I don't think Ryder was going to go any higher than where he was, but he could have been a decent midcard attraction), but they do have a group of guys (Sheamus/Ryback/Bryan/Ziggler/Shield) who've managed to get over and can be big players in the future.

  15. #4990
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    But as I keep coming back to, the talents of a wrestler is based on how many people he can entertain. Because wrestling is about drawing fans and making money. So if John Cena does that the best today (which we can assume based on the fact that WWE still uses him as the face of their company), then he must be the most talented, by definition of what makes a great pro wrestler.
    Well like I said I don't think selling the most tickets makes someone the best. If you want to think otherwise then by all means, I just don't see how that's some kind of indisputable fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    No, Cena isn't Hogan (neither are Rock or Austin, for that matter), but the logic is still sound. Other entertainment franchises do the same (would the Transformers movies be so successful without the audience that watched the cartoon in the '80s?). The tobacco industry has made millions with the same principle: market to younger people now, build a loyal customer base in the future.
    So your gonna question the analogy (also based on principle) to McDonalds I made then make your own comparing it all to horrible movies and tobacco? (Note, I wouldn't call it successful when the director himself apologized for the abomination that was Transformers 2) I'm curious did Hogan get the same split reaction Cena does? I noticed when they had Raw in Vegas and the Cena Sucks chants were quite loud there, he seemed pretty bothered from it. The point was the logic isn't AS sound as nowadays, I just think they can do better instead of hitting cruise control and relying on him so much when he's mostly for the kids.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    WWE doesn't try to alienate anyone (the show is rated TV-PG and guys like Rock, Brock, Punk, Orton, etc. are to appeal to the non-Cena demographics of the WWE fanbase), but you have to understand that children are important in a way that older groups can't be. The Attitude Era was marketed primarily to older audiences, and the fallout once those audiences eventually left (after only 3 years) was disastrous.
    Well me personally anyway I feel alienated a lot of the time just at the massive amount of advertising and plugging they do, let alone the whole thing regarding the content, booking, etc. the statistics at every damn commercial where they feel the need to brag is a recurring example. this seems to have been compounded ever since they went to 3 hours. I can't say I'm looking forward to sitting down and watching Rock cut a promo only to have it turn into a promotion for his next film either. Now I know you meant that they don't try to make this happen, but still.

    as for the rating, they usually don't take advantage of it (to be fair they have been lately, but then again they always kick things up when the returning wrestlers come back) The point was that I think they lean way too much to one side, and Lesnar/Rock are part timers with Orton not exactly the poster boy for the adult demographic either... Maybe if the rumors come true and he does turn heel soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    If you find Punk more entertaining, that's up to you and I would never question that, but that doesn't change that Cena is still better at doing his job (entertaining) than Punk is.
    Yes I know, he sells more seats... If that's all you want to go off of then yes I suppose that would make him the best entertainer.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Actually, Cena is convincing at playing both the good guy and the bad guy and people have paid to see him operate in both elements. And there's a world of difference between brands of restaurants (McDonald's has several advantages over other restaurant chains: it's easily available and widespread, television advertising, the Dollar Menu, etc.) and professional wrestling.
    Still not convinced most of the time, regardless of how many people have paid to see him.


    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Also, on a completely unrelated note - shame on you for trashing McDonald's. Their breakfast menu is a wonderful thing.
    I wasn't trying to trash them. Hell I eat McDonalds too. I was just saying, they aren't really serving up restaurant quality meals left and right either. And yet if you wanted to just go off of sales and outreach, their food could be considered great.


    Quote Originally Posted by -Raiga- View Post
    CM Punk has had some very generous booking. I've already outlined all that he's been given over the past couple years, but even before that he was still a prominent fixture on Raw working with top talent. This idea of Punk not being given opportunities is a myth.
    He has, but not on the level that Cena has or for nearly as long. by ridiculous I meant like what they've been doing the past several weeks slotting Cena in the main event over Punk when he's feuding with the Rock no less...

    Quote Originally Posted by -Raiga- View Post
    I think what laser shuckle was getting at was that there is a certain point when they are pushing Cena so much he's hurting other's ability to try to entertain. As in, WWE expects a diamond in the rough to show up, but they keep checking the same dirt(cena) expecting it to yield drastically different results. Even when someone does make it make it on to their radar, like ryback/ryder/funkasaurus, they let it go to waste. Or ironically, feed them to cena storyline-wise, like ryder/ryback in this case.
    That's part of my issue with him, you put it in a better way then I probably could have.

    Anyway I got a good laugh out of Punk's promo on Raw "That's not Paul Heyman, That's Paul Giamatti." good stuff right there. And it's great to see the Hall of Pain back. I actually enjoyed Mark cleaning house over Lesnar destroying the Miz, although both were fun. Swagger getting hot and bothered with the announce team and then having them still put him over was interesting. I like his new look. Also anyone else actually warming up to Brad Maddox a bit?

    Only thing that was off was them booking the Shield like that. Cena: "The Sheild has been unstoppable" then they end up hastily retreating at the end.

    Great idea...

  16. #4991
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fond du lac, wisconsin
    Posts
    2,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Shuckle View Post
    Anyway I got a good laugh out of Punk's promo on Raw "That's not Paul Heyman, That's Paul Giamatti." good stuff right there.
    Twas the highlight for me too. Plus the idea of vince paying for a CGI paul heyman was more entertaining then it should have been.
    ----------------------------------

  17. #4992
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    594

    Default

    I wonder if Bane (Maddox because he randomly did a Bane impression whilst talking about justice) will show up in Superman (Cena), The Juggernaut (Ryback) & Superboy Prime(Sheamus)'s corner against The Joker (Ambrose) & Co. in the EC, considering all 4 of them hate The Shield.
    As to what once, it now is. For this my retirement tour, let us commence, forevermore, forevermore.

  18. #4993
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Shuckle View Post
    Well like I said I don't think selling the most tickets makes someone the best. If you want to think otherwise then by all means, I just don't see how that's some kind of indisputable fact.
    Because everything a wrestler does is done for the sole purpose of getting fans to want to see them. That's the reason that they're even there in the first place, to provide entertainment that we'd pay for.

    How else should their talents be judged?

    So your gonna question the analogy (also based on principle) to McDonalds I made then make your own comparing it all to horrible movies and tobacco? (Note, I wouldn't call it successful when the director himself apologized for the abomination that was Transformers 2) I'm curious did Hogan get the same split reaction Cena does? I noticed when they had Raw in Vegas and the Cena Sucks chants were quite loud there, he seemed pretty bothered from it. The point was the logic isn't AS sound as nowadays, I just think they can do better instead of hitting cruise control and relying on him so much when he's mostly for the kids.
    Those examples were to show how successful marketing to children is, not a question of quality (like your McDonald's example). There's a difference between the two. Quality in wrestling can't be compared to quality in foods or movies, but business strategies can.

    And yes, Hogan did get mixed reactions, particularly after going to WCW. Really you'll find that plenty of guys in the Hogan/Cena spot (Rock, Michaels) have had periods where they went through a part of the audience getting tired of them. It's a consequence of all the programming WWE does. "Stone Cold" Steve Austin is the one exception to that rule I can think of, and then only because he missed a lot of time due to injuries.

    Well me personally anyway I feel alienated a lot of the time just at the massive amount of advertising and plugging they do, let alone the whole thing regarding the content, booking, etc. the statistics at every damn commercial where they feel the need to brag is a recurring example. this seems to have been compounded ever since they went to 3 hours. I can't say I'm looking forward to sitting down and watching Rock cut a promo only to have it turn into a promotion for his next film either. Now I know you meant that they don't try to make this happen, but still.
    I agree with a lot of that, in that the self-promotion and advertising gets to be a bit much, but I'm not sure what any of it has to do with John Cena.

    He has, but not on the level that Cena has or for nearly as long. by ridiculous I meant like what they've been doing the past several weeks slotting Cena in the main event over Punk when he's feuding with the Rock no less...
    If you go through the first couple years of Punk's history, and the first couple years of Cena's, you'd find that Punk received more generous booking from the beginning.

    In the years up until his first WWE title win, Punk got: to appear on a brand run by a man who ensured he'd be well taken care of (Paul Heyman); he was on a six-month undefeated streak; won the ECW title within a year of his debut; won the Money in the Bank briefcase twice; won the World Heavyweight Championship three times; got to make his pay-per-view debut, teaming with D-Generation X, in a city where he'd already have an established fan base (Philadelphia); and worked with top-name talent (Jeff Hardy - who he got to retire, The Undertaker, Rey Mysterio, Big Show, Randy Orton, John Cena). There are only a handful of guys who got that much in such a short period of time.

    And Cena got to main event over Rock/Punk twice, and that was (1) to do the "everyone in the Rumble brawls" bit that they do every year and (2) on an episode of Raw that Rock wasn't even on. Rock and Punk not only main evented two Raws out of three in the Rumble lead up, they dominated the advertising, and they main evented the pay-per-view itself. The only other times they didn't main event were on SmackDown, and the post-Rumble Raw where Brock Lesnar returned.
    Last edited by charizardfan; 8th February 2013 at 1:25 PM.

  19. #4994
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Armando Payne View Post
    I wonder if Bane (Maddox because he randomly did a Bane impression whilst talking about justice) will show up in Superman (Cena), The Juggernaut (Ryback) & Superboy Prime(Sheamus)'s corner against The Joker (Ambrose) & Co. in the EC, considering all 4 of them hate The Shield.
    your analogy, while clever in a sense, doesn't make sense at the same time. especially throwing in a Marvel character with a bunch of DC characters.

  20. #4995
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Some type of hell
    Posts
    818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    In the years up until his first WWE title win, Punk got: to appear on a brand run by a man who ensured he'd be well taken care of (Paul Heyman); he was on a six-month undefeated streak; won the ECW title within a year of his debut; won the Money in the Bank briefcase twice; won the World Heavyweight Championship three times; got to make his pay-per-view debut, teaming with D-Generation X, in a city where he'd already have an established fan base (Philadelphia); and worked with top-name talent (Jeff Hardy - who he got to retire, The Undertaker, Rey Mysterio, Big Show, Randy Orton, John Cena). There are only a handful of guys who got that much in such a short period of time.
    let's break this badboy down, shall we?
    •from what i remember, raw and smackdown were the big boy brands, while ecw was the pipsqueak excuse to promote new superstars. so the achievements cm punk has had while being an ecw superstar are comparable with mid-card success

    •in the weeks leading to mitb match in 2007, people were wondering it edge would be able to win it twice and, thus making history, instead, edge was the first person to cash in 2 briefcases. Kennedy was the first mitb not to cash it in. cena was first mitb winner who didn't win his title match. kane has the shortest time for a mitb possessor. ziggler will probably have it for the longest time. the wwe has been interested in making trivial history out of mitb since its inception. so it makes sense that they would have a "first person to win mitb twice" guy. and they chose him i guess because he was a popular mid-carder in 2009

    •i can't say anything about dx seeing as i don't remember that

    •jeff hardy is a bad example because that was after cm punk cashed in mitb. every mitb winner has a rivalry with big people
    -okay, so he retired him, but that was just to push cm punk as a heel

    •after the Hardy fiasco, he had the undertaker rivalry. at this point he was one of the main heels in smackdown. it's not as if he was given this spontaneous opportunity

    •rey mysterio is a bad example because it's rey mysterio. he's not the same guy who miraculously won the royal rumble and later the triple threat WHC match. the wwe doesn't take him seriously, and he's pitted against random people all the time, just a bad example altogether

    •i don't remember the big show rivalry, if that was after "pipebomb '11" then it's a bad example

    •randy orton, was that when orton attacked punk and took him out of the scramble match?

    •john cena was after "pipebomb". bad example

    yes, there are only a handful of people who get stuff like this. it's like a test. cm punk was a good ecw superstar and got promoted to raw. he was a good mid-carder and was awarded mitb. he a got a taste of the world title picture and did good enough that the wwe promoted him to a top mid-carder. they also wanted a "1st person to win mitb twice" guy, so they awarded it to punk. they challenged him with a heel turn, and he met their expectations by becoming one of the main.heels of smackdown and wwe. but his gimmick became stupid, so then he was forced to pick up the pieces of the nexus. then everything changed that one monday night when he told the world how he felt about vince and the wwe. new nexus was dropped. and he became a star.

    he advanced because he has the talent and charisma that others don't have. but his history in the wwe isn't as generous as you claim. right now, his hard work has placed him as the #2 superstar in the wwe, and i think the only reasons why he's not #1 is because people pay to watch cena valiantly win (if you're a kid) or miserably lose (if you're an attitude fanboy), because he is responsible for the majority of the pg audience, and because he's easier for vince, the wwe board, and the writers to manage and communicate with over the loose cannon known as cm punk

    A New World Order: Birth of a Prophecy

    Credit to Brutaka

  21. #4996
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Because everything a wrestler does is done for the sole purpose of getting fans to want to see them. That's the reason that they're even there in the first place, to provide entertainment that we'd pay for.
    Or maybe to put on a good show for the fans who do happen to be watching.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    How else should their talents be judged?
    Ring skills, charisma, all the other details that get glazed over. If you think Cena has it all then fine, I just find fault with saying he's the best they have just because a lot of people buy into him.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    Those examples were to show how successful marketing to children is, not a question of quality (like your McDonald's example). There's a difference between the two. Quality in wrestling can't be compared to quality in foods or movies, but business strategies can.
    I don't see how your analogy is any better, but ok. I was making a point based on principle.

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    I agree with a lot of that, in that the self-promotion and advertising gets to be a bit much, but I'm not sure what any of it has to do with John Cena.
    Obviously it doesn't. You made a comment about them not trying to alienate the fanbase and I made an honest reply. that's it...

    Quote Originally Posted by charizardfan View Post
    If you go through the first couple years of Punk's history, and the first couple years of Cena's, you'd find that Punk received more generous booking from the beginning.

    In the years up until his first WWE title win, Punk got: to appear on a brand run by a man who ensured he'd be well taken care of (Paul Heyman); he was on a six-month undefeated streak; won the ECW title within a year of his debut; won the Money in the Bank briefcase twice; won the World Heavyweight Championship three times; got to make his pay-per-view debut, teaming with D-Generation X, in a city where he'd already have an established fan base (Philadelphia); and worked with top-name talent (Jeff Hardy - who he got to retire, The Undertaker, Rey Mysterio, Big Show, Randy Orton, John Cena). There are only a handful of guys who got that much in such a short period of time.

    And Cena got to main event over Rock/Punk twice, and that was (1) to do the "everyone in the Rumble brawls" bit that they do every year and (2) on an episode of Raw that Rock wasn't even on. Rock and Punk not only main evented two Raws out of three in the Rumble lead up, they dominated the advertising, and they main evented the pay-per-view itself. The only other times they didn't main event were on SmackDown, and the post-Rumble Raw where Brock Lesnar returned.
    I'll admit it's nitpicking at this point, but it's still ridiculous to see him getting the spot over Punk/Rock when he's not doing nearly as much storyline wise. But I'm sure it can be easily chalked up to Cena being "the guy" etc.

    At this point I'm done with the back and forth, I think this is as close as I'm going to get with what I originally asked for.
    Last edited by Laser Shuckle; 8th February 2013 at 8:08 PM.

  22. #4997
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    594

    Default

    Hm, after last nights raw, it's not really a hassle for me to keep watching lately for raw being 3 hours. Decent range of matches, story line progress, and things happening on raw last night. However, I still find that there are too many filler parts of videos and vignettes lately hyping stuff. Like if it's before commercial or something I don't care as it gives me a reason to keep watching what's next, but just a bunch of recaps/videos that I don't care for make my attention not as focused. If they cut some of those for more in ring action I'd be happier.

    Overall last night had some pretty interesting things happening. Two great matches that involved Ziggler v. Kane and Bryan v. Jericho with SD EC implications on the line. Mostly squash matches with Del Rio v. Sandow, Khali v. Henry, Swagger v. Ryder, Tensai/Funk v. Colons, and Team Superman v. 3MB and a DQ finish for Miz/Rhodes. Barrett v. Kofi was a good, albeit short match between the two, but involved past matches between the two being brought up and added overall to it being a nice little match for television. I have to admit Kofi can make a lot of guys look good in matches he has. Regardless of him ever pushing the main event, he'll always be a credible midcard guy that wins over will make you look good.

    The one thing I loved about last night was the crowd, Tennesse was red hot last night and we saw what a wrestling crowd should be with involvement from the fans. They were red hot for jericho v. bryan, kane v. ziggler, the shield and team superman segments, Punk/Heyman/Rock, and were good for the sandow/rio segement before the match. Also Cody's Mustache I think got a reaction too (news has yet to get back to me on this one). That is what made the show so watchable last night. The shield had a great promo against the problem of team superman, team superman did their usual routine but the crowd ate it up. They finally go edgy a bit with people by bringing back an old school guy in Zeb Coulter aka Dutch Mantel. I don't know much about the guy but my dad told me stories of him years back when he was growing up with wrestling and I vaguely remember Dutch Mantel among names but I remember him from a wrestling card. After that promo they better follow up with something with Zeb and Swagger, because this could lead to some big things for him if they are willing to let a promo like that happen. Overall it was a great episode and I can't wait for the EC this sunday. So much hype it better be something to watch.
    Thanks, to the awesome artist of our clan, Team Nightmare, zek4040 for this AMAZING banner.



    Leader of Pokemon Online's Scripted Server Tournaments channel

    Pokemon Online is now on Android: http://pokemon-online.eu/pages/download/

  23. #4998
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    I liked the Coulter promo and Henry inducting Hornswoggle into the Hall of Pain.

    Seems like They are setting up Swagger to clash with Del Rio now.
    Last edited by Laser Shuckle; 12th February 2013 at 7:43 AM.

  24. #4999
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Giza Plains/Westersand
    Posts
    64

    Default

    wow. I have no idea why there is a WWE thread here, but I think the ref is going to allow this. I've missed the past couple months cause my computer forgot what the internet is. The PS3 I'm on cant play anything but youtube. Can't wait for Chris Hero to show (if he hasn't already). Anywhoooo RVD RVD TNA TNA!

  25. #5000
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Some type of hell
    Posts
    818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by psychonerderer View Post
    Anywhoooo RVD RVD TNA TNA!
    hmm... I think you're looking for “The Official TNA Thread, Sister?" Thread that was started by larvitar503

    anywhoooo i didn't see much of raw but it didn't seem like much was going on. it seems like they really rushed the royal rumble and elimination chamber PPVs. i guess the point is to have a lot of weeks to promote wrestlemania. so I'm hoping the little effort used for these 2 PPVs will be made up in wrestlemania

    A New World Order: Birth of a Prophecy

    Credit to Brutaka

Page 200 of 288 FirstFirst ... 100150190196197198199200201202203204210250 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •