The Official WWE / NXT Discussion Thread *May Contain Spoilers*

[shadowflame]

Lol

[lazorbeak]

<p>You go out to play some sports and an argument breaks out! I agree with everybody arguing that the baseline revenue increases FAR outweigh the potential side effects of them getting a big ego and/or becoming too big for the business. Yeah it hurts when Hogan jumps to WCW in the mid 90's but would Vince trade 8 years of record breaking business? Hogan/Andre? Hogan/Savage? Hogan/Warrior? I doubt it. </p><p> </p><p> Now a couple of fact checks:</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="PeterHilton" data-cite="PeterHilton" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Second..Logan your brain is screwy because Austin put over The Rock big time early in their rivalry (although you could argue Rocky would've been a star regardless) and then, when Triple H made his jump to the main event in 01, it was his feud with Austin (specifically going over clean at No Way in that 2-of-3 fall match) that cemented him as a main eventer.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Austin put the Rock over early in their rivalry? Austin beat the Rock (and beat down the Nation) in 5 minutes to defend his IC belt and then literally gave the Rock the belt in 1997. Rock then got over without any interaction with Austin for 11 months to the point that by Survivor Series 1998 he was getting Austin level babyface reactions, then did the screw-job redux, feuded with Mankind, and only worked with Austin again in '99, with Austin going over. So no, Austin didn't put Rock over big time, and yeah, Rock did become a star regardless.</p><p> </p><p> And Triple H had been a main eventer for 18 months by the time Austin put him over at No Way Out: Austin specifically refused to put Triple H over at Summerslam 1999, leading to Mankind's one day reign. Now it's not Austin's fault he didn't work with Triple H in the meantime as he spent most of the next year dealing with injuries and recharging his batteries, but Triple H had already won the main event of Wrestlemania by the time he beat Austin. Rock, Mankind, and Vince McMahon busted their asses to make Triple H a top guy, but that had nothing to do with Austin. </p><p> </p><p> Maybe you were thinking of Triple H retaining the title over Austin at No Mercy in 1999, where Austin did job, albeit not cleanly, to Triple H after the Rock accidentally hit him with a sledgehammer. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="shawn michaels 82" data-cite="shawn michaels 82" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>First of all, Autin didn't exactly leave. He would still be in the ring to this day if it wasn't for Owen and some other injuries. And the Rock...well,yes he is the only one having a succesfull career...but he is not a leading man to any extent and in any degree. A good career,but he's not the next Schwarzennegger. Not yet at least. And i doubt he'll get bigger. From now on...down is the way. And he will end up returning like they all do.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> This is also ridiculous. Dwayne Johnson is the definition of a "leading man." He was the lead in the Tooth Fairy (60 mil domestic), Area 51 (40 mil domestic), Race to Witch Mountain (67 mil domestic), and the Game Plan (96 mil domestic) in the past 3 years, and a featured player in Get Smart (130 mil domestic). That's starring in 4 movies and being featured in 5 in 3 years time He's not the next Ahnold because he's not trying to be an action star, and he won't be coming back as an active wrestler, because he is making millions more doing a lot less. Plus he's actually a good actor, so it's not like he'll all of a sudden be unable to find work.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> As far as why Cena isn't bigger, the thing is, one guy by himself can only be so over. Austin got so big in part because McMahon was also that over. Rock and Triple H became big stars because the crowd wanted to see the two fight each other. As big a deal as Hogan was, his feud with Andre made him the biggest star on the planet. Wrestling is not a sport where one guy can just be vaulted above absolutely everyone else for any sustained period of time. As over as Cena is (and he is over), it's rare that he goes into feuds with guys that are in a position to make him a bigger star. They fed HBK and HHH to him, but after that, who else is there on that same level? Undertaker?</p>

[shadowflame]

OOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH sic burn

[Stennick]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Candyman" data-cite="Candyman" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> </p><p> No offense but do you even follow football? It's ridiculous beyond words to even mention TO and Brett Favre in the same post, let alone insinuate they're remotely similiar in terms of attitude.</p><p> </p><p> TO called his quarterback gay in San Francisco. He wasn't happy with his individual production there, so he forced his way out. Then when he didn't like where he was traded, he refused to report until they sent him somewhere else. He got his wish again, signed a seven year deal, and after one season demanded to renegotiate. When the team refused, he literally tore the team apart from the inside out. He was such a cancer that he was suspended for the maximum number of games allowed and then paid to sit at home for the rest of the season. Seriously - they were willing to pay him to stay away from the team. That doesn't sound like the good was outweighing the bad.</p><p> </p><p> What has Brett Favre done that's remotely comparable to any of that? Which teammates has he pubically attacked? When did he holdout? When did he force a suspension and a paid vacation? Ok, he takes his time deciding if he's going to play. Green Bay didn't have a problem with it until the last season - and when they did, they simply traded him. Minnesota's never had a problem with it. Their coach has repeatedly said that there's no timetable. <strong>And I've never seen one thing that indicates he's anything but the best teammate imaginable once he joins the team.</strong></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> No offense but do you even read the news? The following are just the first two links I found when I googled Bret and the New York Jets. I won't even go into the he said she said of the GB/Bret situation. </p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.satelliteguys.us/sports-section/159718-favre-teammates-now-throwing-him-under.html" rel="external nofollow">http://www.satelliteguys.us/sports-section/159718-favre-teammates-now-throwing-him-under.html</a></p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/36986889.html" rel="external nofollow">http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/36986889.html</a></p><p> </p><p> You're mis understanding what I'm saying so no offense taken. I'm an incredibly huge football nut. Although I will say I bet you if I googled Bret Favre I could find five or ten different articles on him taking shots at Green Bay, his teamates in NY taking shots at him and about how rough things were at the start of this Vikings career because of missing training camp and not signing until the last minute. I'm not saying he's a bad guy but to say you've never heard of him being anything but a good team player is kind of silly. </p><p> </p><p> All that being said I'm not saying their the same TYPE of locker room distraction but none the less they are both locker room distractions. You know that if you hire Bret Favre on to QB your team the media are going to be breathing down your neck all pre season long as well as there may be some inner resentment that Bret is sitting out camp. So you can't tell me there isn't SOME "megastar" setbacks to having Bret Favre on your team. Are they the same as T.O'.s "setbacks" no but set backs are setbacks IMO. When you're on that level as a player to the point where the things you do distract the rest of the team and reflect highly on your team thats the category those guys are both in.</p>

[TheEdgeOfReason]

Just to throw in there, Chilly tries to bench Favre during the Panthers game last year. Favre wouldn't allow it.

[lazorbeak]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> What we think of "yo-yo" pushes is really a way to control how popular a wrestler is. You've seen this Mark Henry. Last year, he was beating Randy Orton. This year, his jobbing out to Wade Barrett. It's way to make sure they don't get more popular than WWE think they should.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Really? I must've missed the show where Henry cleanly pinned Randy Orton in a meaningful match on PPV. Wait, that never happened! Henry won a throwaway TV match minutes after Orton had just wrestled somebody else. Henry was never booked as a main eventer on Orton's level, ever, so it's not particularly surprising that he's in the same spot now he was in a year ago.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> So, in fact, the only other conclusion is the WWE has idiotically bungled Mark Henry's, R-Truth's, Jack Swagger's, Dolph Ziggler's, and a lot of other's pushes because they don't just don't know how to do it right.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Wait, what? Everyone that isn't in the main event had their push idiotically bungled? Because they.... lost matches? You know, not everyone can be a winner at the PPV? Not everyone can be in the main event. It's a fact of life that the guys that are in the main event tend to beat these guys when it comes to the nitty gritty because WWE has invested in guys like Cena, Orton, Edge, Jericho, Big Show, Undertaker, Mysterio and HHH as their top guys. If we push Evan Bourne into the main event, whose spot is he going to take? Is he going to draw more money than Triple H has? Is Dolph Ziggler going to replace Undertaker as a locker room leader? </p><p> </p><p> That's not to say there's no upward mobility. Once John Cena was at the level Jack Swagger, Dolph Ziggler, R-Truth and the rest were at. But through hard work, dedication, charisma, and solid booking, he started getting reactions at the main event level and JBL, Jericho, Angle, and Triple H put him over in the course of a year to solidify him as a top guy.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> Or they are intentionally doing it, or they aren't. If they are, they are being controlling. If they aren't, they are being incompetent. </p><p> </p><p> I rather think they are just being over-controlling, rather than being utterly incompetent.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You seem to think WWE is incompetent for not throwing everybody in the main event, but their goal has never been to make everybody a top guy. The industry can't support that: only so many guys can be at the top at any one time. It's a business and that business requires guys on the top, more guys in the middle, and even more guys at the bottom to make the middle guys look strong.</p>

[Stennick]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheEdgeOfReason" data-cite="TheEdgeOfReason" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Just to throw in there, Chilly tries to bench Favre during the Panthers game last year. Favre wouldn't allow it.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah they had a shouting match or two on the sidelines where it took them a week to make up. It was a huge story and people were clowning Chilly for letting Favre tell him what to do. So to say Favre is a fantastic teammate is silly. I don't watch football but somehow all of these Favre incidents never happened? I'm not saying the guy is T.O and that wasn't my intention but they guy is less than perfect as a teammate and to say you've never heard anything bad said about him is silly.</p>

[ampulator]

That's true, but they can be CLOSE to being the top guy, if they aren't the top guy. The way they do it now is just one top guy, a few near-top guys, and everyone else is chop liver.

[The Final Countdown]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Is Dolph Ziggler going to replace Undertaker as a locker room leader? </div></blockquote><p> Heck yes! He can take care of any troublemakers with his vaunted sleeper hold!</p>

[ampulator]

<p>The thing is, WWE's ringwork has gone down the drain for a while. Yes, you don't need a lot of ringwork to get the job done. But you need SOMETHING. Hogan was pretty much the absolute minimum in terms of ringwork. Any less, and it's doesn't really cut it. There's no one even on his level right now, in terms of ringwork for a top guy. </p><p> </p><p>

Seriously, who wants to see the Cena/Batista, Cena/Orton, or Cena/HHH matches again? They were awkward at best, botchy at worst. They tried to put them against each other in several combos, but either everyone has bad chemistry together (improbable), WWE is overscripting (possible, but every time?), or someone is just plain not working out.</p><p> </p><p>

Even though WWE isn't about matches and ringwork, the big payoff IS the matches. Even if there regular matches don't cut it, and they don't need to, their big payoff matches do.... but they don't. Say what you will about matches and ringwork in general... the Big Payoff matches MUST be good. Otherwise, it's going to go over like a popcorn fart in a crowded theater.</p>

[Stennick]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The thing is, WWE's ringwork has gone down the drain for a while. Yes, you don't need a lot of ringwork to get the job done. But you need SOMETHING. <strong>Hogan was pretty much the absolute minimum in terms of ringwork. Any less, and it's doesn't really cut it. There's no one even on his level right now, in terms of ringwork for a top guy. </strong><p> </p><p> Seriously, who wants to see the Cena/Batista, Cena/Orton, or Cena/HHH matches again? They were awkward at best, botchy at worst. They tried to put them against each other in several combos, but either everyone has bad chemistry together (improbable), WWE is overscripting (possible, but every time?), or someone is just plain not working out.</p><p> </p><p> Even though WWE isn't about matches and ringwork, the big payoff IS the matches. Even if there regular matches don't cut it, and they don't need to, their big payoff matches do.... but they don't. Say what you will about matches and ringwork in general... the Big Payoff matches MUST be good. Otherwise, it's going to go over like a popcorn fart in a crowded theater.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Are you saying that HHH, Orton, and Cena among others don't have the in ring work that HOGAN had? You're joking right? I'm not a fan of Orton, Cena or HHH but all of them are ten times the wrestler that Hogan was or let me say was in the WWE/F. </p><p> </p><p> Seriously man I think you have a much different view on what pro wrestling is than the rest of the world. Anybody that says HHH, Cena and Orton aren't better wrestlers than Hogan was when he couldn't even do a leg drop correctly I just don't know. </p><p> </p><p> No offense man but I think I'm going to stop responding to your posts because it seems like otherwise I would just be constantly arguing what are in my eyes less than sane thoughts.</p>

[ampulator]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Stennick" data-cite="Stennick" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Are you saying that HHH, Orton, and Cena among others don't have the in ring work that HOGAN had? You're joking right? I'm not a fan of Orton, Cena or HHH but all of them are ten times the wrestler that Hogan was or let me say was in the WWE/F. <p> </p><p> Seriously man I think you have a much different view on what pro wrestling is than the rest of the world. Anybody that says HHH, Cena and Orton aren't better wrestlers than Hogan was when he couldn't even do a leg drop correctly I just don't know. </p><p> </p><p> No offense man but I think I'm going to stop responding to your posts because it seems like otherwise I would just be constantly arguing what are in my eyes less than sane thoughts.</p></div></blockquote><p> Sorry I didn't elaborate... what I meant was, in general, their ringwork is not where it should be in the right areas. </p><p> </p><p> Can Triple H, Cena, and Orton brawl, and do better technical moves than Hogan? Yes. </p><p> </p><p> But they don't have is, Hogan's psychology. That's what I meant by ringwork. They just don't have enough it. </p><p> </p><p> Triple H is average in brawling an technical stuff, and he's pretty consistent and has solid fundamentals, but his psychology, at best is good, but there's more to psychology than that. </p><p> </p><p> The reason why I find Drew McIntyre, and Ted Dibiase, for that matter, so boring, is because their psychology, as best described, a seriously of non-conflicting moves and spots. They don't botch their moves or matches, but as a whole, their ringwork doesn't mesh together. </p><p> </p><p> Triple H is at a higher level; his ringwork DOES mesh together. But he's missing the Hogan/Flair level, which no one in WWE has, but something they need to have... the ability to have the match itself draw the crowd in. Hogan always had that. Flair had that, and much more. </p><p> </p><p> Cena, and Orton don't. They barely can do what Triple H does in terms of psychology. </p><p> </p><p> As for ignoring my posts, if I treat you well, you should treat ME well. I think some of your posts are stupid, but I don't dismiss them. You shouldn't ignore me just because you think differently. </p><p> </p><p> And I might have different view from other people, but so do you. I don't think my beliefs are out of the ordinary, though. In fact, out-of-the-ordinary would be Russo. I'm more in-line than you think I am. We see the same facts, but perhaps come to different conclusions and the weigh each fact differently. You question my sanity, but thoughts aren't insane. Insane would be thinking I can become a booker/writer/wrestler. Insane would to think I can jump in the ring and actually take on a wrestler. </p><p> </p><p> Clearly, I'm not insane. Just different from your ideas.</p><p> </p><p> And finally... the argument, or I would prefer, debate, never ends. It shouldn't. The end of the argument where wrestling is headed and/or should be headed would be the end of wrestling itself, because then there wouldn't be anything to debate about anymore, period.</p><p> </p><p> I don't know about you, but I ENJOY this debate. I WANT to be proven wrong. I LIKE it. It actually disappoints me when someone can't prove me wrong. I WANT people to do it.</p>

[MrOnu]

<p>At some point, I'll need to be educated about this ring psychology thing. Even after all those years of watching, I don't think I get what it is supposed to be. Or maybe it's a forest and I can't help but only see the individual trees. </p><p> </p><p>

As for what more can be done about Cena, let me throw a curveball here : being a genuine heel for an extended period of time. I can't remember the last time Cena was heel and relevant to the program. Maybe turning him heel for a period could make him an even bigger face on the long run. This is not a magic formula, it could bomb seriously or simply maintain Cena's popularity, who knows, I'm just throwing the suggestion around. Of course, to work, you would need a big face opponent at some point which is not a very common thing these days in the E.</p>

[MrOnu]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Triple H is at a higher level; his ringwork DOES mesh together. But he's missing the Hogan/Flair level, which no one in WWE has, but something they need to have... the ability to have the match itself draw the crowd in. Hogan always had that. Flair had that, and much more. </div></blockquote><p> </p><p> You might be setting the bar too high on this. Hogan and Flair could very well be the exceptionnal masters of what you described as ring psychology, you know the top 1% of the wrestling population in that particular area. Expecting every other wrestler to be that great could only lead to disappointment. In that scenario, HHH would be above average, let's say the top 25% for the sake of putting a number. Cena, Orton, a good portion of the WWE roster, would be right on the average or slightly above, with the hypothesis that if you're working in the biggest company, unless you have one hell of a freaking selling point (Khali's size as an example), you'd be probably be close to the average on many general aspects of the wrestling craft such a pyschology, selling or fundamentals. </p><p> </p><p> I know it's far from perfect, but it helps to think of many things in life following a good old bell curve <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

[ampulator]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MrOnu" data-cite="MrOnu" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You might be setting the bar too high on this. Hogan and Flair could very well be the exceptionnal masters of what you described as ring psychology, you know the top 1% of the wrestling population in that particular area. Expecting every other wrestler to be that great could only lead to disappointment. In that scenario, HHH would be above average, let's say the top 25% for the sake of putting a number. Cena, Orton, a good portion of the WWE roster, would be right on the average or slightly above, with the hypothesis that if you're working in the biggest company, unless you have one hell of a freaking selling point (Khali's size as an example), you'd be probably be close to the average on many general aspects of the wrestling craft such a pyschology, selling or fundamentals. <p> </p><p> I know it's far from perfect, but it helps to think of many things in life following a good old bell curve <img alt=";)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/wink.png.686f06e511ee1fbf6bdc7d82f6831e53.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> I guess that's a fair point. </p><p> </p><p> Still, shouldn't there be at least ONE person in the WWE that can have the psychology I'm talking about? </p><p> </p><p> I mean, I would rank Triple H's psychology at B. (And I'm a fan of HHH, so this isn't any bias AGAINST him... if anything, some you may believe I favor him too much). C.M. Punk, Kurt Angle, and Bryan Danielson would also be at B. The Miz would be a B-. </p><p> The only two I would rank at B+ would have been the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels... but HBK is retired, and in Undertaker's case, his body is too messed up to put his psychology to good use.</p>

[lazorbeak]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MrOnu" data-cite="MrOnu" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>At some point, I'll need to be educated about this ring psychology thing. Even after all those years of watching, I don't think I get what it is supposed to be. Or maybe it's a forest and I can't help but only see the individual trees. <p> </p><p> As for what more can be done about Cena, let me throw a curveball here : being a genuine heel for an extended period of time. I can't remember the last time Cena was heel and relevant to the program. Maybe turning him heel for a period could make him an even bigger face on the long run. This is not a magic formula, it could bomb seriously or simply maintain Cena's popularity, who knows, I'm just throwing the suggestion around. Of course, to work, you would need a big face opponent at some point which is not a very common thing these days in the E.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think you're right and I've been saying for a year the guy that should do it is Randy Orton. As played out as their feud was a year ago, with Orton as a babyface still playing a psychotic Cena has a genuine reason to turn: he's done everything for the fans, done all the make-a-wish stuff, and dedicated his life to the sport, but the fans choose to cheer for a psychotic malcontent like Orton. For extra heat some McMahon should come out and basically say Cena is everything they want in a champion and Orton is a disgrace to the belt, his family, etc. then manufacture some screwy finish that takes the belt off Orton and gets it onto Cena. I mean yes at a certain point it's re-hashing the Rock/Austin program but that's a money program and it hasn't been done in 11 years, so it passes the 7 year rule.</p>

[lazorbeak]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ampulator" data-cite="ampulator" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I guess that's a fair point. <p> </p><p> Still, shouldn't there be at least ONE person in the WWE that can have the psychology I'm talking about? </p><p> </p><p> I mean, I would rank Triple H's psychology at B. (And I'm a fan of HHH, so this isn't any bias AGAINST him... if anything, some you may believe I favor him too much). C.M. Punk, Kurt Angle, and Bryan Danielson would also be at B. The Miz would be a B-. </p><p> The only two I would rank at B+ would have been the Undertaker and Shawn Michaels... but HBK is retired, and in Undertaker's case, his body is too messed up to put his psychology to good use.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Dude seriously this isn't the place to bring up what your fantasy stats would be for WWE guys in TEW. And just for comparison, 15 guys active in the US in the C-Verse have an A for psychology. And you're saying 0 WWE guys would match that?</p><p> </p><p> Compare that to the C-Verse, where 7 of those 15 guys work for either SWF or TCW.</p>

[ampulator]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="lazorbeak" data-cite="lazorbeak" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Dude seriously this isn't the place to bring up what your fantasy stats would be for WWE guys in TEW. And just for comparison, 15 guys active in the US in the C-Verse have an A for psychology. And you're saying 0 WWE guys would match that?<p> </p><p> Compare that to the C-Verse, where 7 of those 15 guys work for either SWF or TCW.</p></div></blockquote><p> Another fair point. I concede that too. But to be fair, the Cverse isn't real life, so it's entirely possible that most workers today are lacking in psychology. I do actually believe that's the case.</p>

[Moe Hunter]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="MrOnu" data-cite="MrOnu" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>At some point, I'll need to be educated about this ring psychology thing. Even after all those years of watching, I don't think I get what it is supposed to be. Or maybe it's a forest and I can't help but only see the individual trees.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Psychology at its most simple level is having the match make sense. It's about having a good flow, and telling a good story. Bret Hart had fantastic psychology - even against similar opponents, he would change his "strategy" so to speak. He did have his combo finish, but it wasn't the be-all end-all of his ring work. Cena on the other hand went for a long, long time just taking a beating then hitting his 5 Moves of Doom. Hogan has been the same for a long time, too.</p><p> </p><p> Matt Hardy has fantastic psychology. For a prime example of this, check out the first 8man MitB match. Multi-Man Ladder matches are often just spotfests (the opposite of a good psychological match), but Matt really shone through here. He convinced his brother Jeff to do the super high-risk dive that broke the ladder outside. This eliminated his most hated rival in history (Edge), and also eliminated Jeff meaning that not only did it take out two competitors, elevating Matt's individual chances, but it also meant he didn't have to *fight* his brother.</p><p> </p><p> Later in the match King Booker was inches away from winning, when Matt grabbed Sharmell (who had been pestering him). He knew that even though Booker was a bad guy, he *had* to choose his wife over the win.</p><p> </p><p> Psychology pretty much comes down to "if this was legit, what would I do? What would I gain from doing this move or that move?"</p><p> </p><p> While I disagree with Ampulator's thinking on a lot of this, I agree that the combination of Orton, Cena and Triple H is plain awful. Remember their Triple Threat match on PPV last year? Cena stopped Triple H from doing a Pedigree through the Announce Table - to follow it up by putting Orton in the STF on the table... What does that achieve? He can't win on the outside, and the Pedigree would have hurt both H & Orton more than what he did. And he could have done the STF after the Pedigree. </p><p> </p><p> Later in the match, Triple H has Orton in a Sharpshooter. Instead of breaking it, Cena puts the other half of Orton in a Crossface. To what end? There's no way he could win by doing it, and if anything increases Triple H's chances.</p>

[Gabbo]

I agree Cena, Batista and Orton have awful psychology. Cena's is the worst I've seen in a top top guy. The heart is there and he does entertain the kids, but his matches make no sense and are just ridiculously lazy in terms of selling. Hogan flittered between selling and not bothering but he had a supernatural 'Hulking up' that gave it some plausibility. Cena is just a normal guy, the underdog, just one guy who gives it his all for the fans.

 

Triple is better, but just doesn't have chemistry with any of the new top guys. Partly due to the fact his matches are now so lazy they are just a collection of spots, practised and re-practised for the last ten years. There's nothing new about him or his ringwork and it annoys me. He hasn't had a really good match in about 6 years so that's something to do with it.

 

I actually thought Batista did gel with Cena and Undertaker though. Something clicked when he got in the ring with them. The matches were never great between Cena and Batista but there was a spark there.

 

Orton seems to have his character down to a tee and the psychology, even down to the slightest things like facial twitches is superb but his ringwork is really lacking. It's often covered up due to his 'cool' persona and awesome finishing move, but in general he's so dull in the ring.

 

Hogan was the guy in terms of psychology, but wrestling was a simpler time. He wrestled for kids, by the end of the 80's he was hated in dirtsheets and wrestling communities. WON even made him Most Over-Rated wrestler of the year at the height of his fame in the '85 and '86. Much like Cena was in 2007.

 

Undertaker, Michaels, Punk, Angle, Mysterio, Jericho and Foley have great psychology too. I feel Lesnar was on his way there, maybe due to working with Angle so much.

[Hive]

Am I the only one who is high on Orton both inside and outside of the ring...?

[Comradebot]

Am I the only one who is high on Orton both inside and outside of the ring...?

 

Probably.

[ampulator]

Matt Hardy has fantastic psychology. For a prime example of this, check out the first 8man MitB match. Multi-Man Ladder matches are often just spotfests (the opposite of a good psychological match), but Matt really shone through here. He convinced his brother Jeff to do the super high-risk dive that broke the ladder outside. This eliminated his most hated rival in history (Edge), and also eliminated Jeff meaning that not only did it take out two competitors, elevating Matt's individual chances, but it also meant he didn't have to *fight* his brother.

 

Later in the match King Booker was inches away from winning, when Matt grabbed Sharmell (who had been pestering him). He knew that even though Booker was a bad guy, he *had* to choose his wife over the win.

 

Actually, not all of that I consider psychology. For all we know, what Matt Hardy "did" could have been just been scripted or pre-planned between the WWE, Booker T, Matt Hardy, Jeff Hardy, and/or Edge. That's just simply good scripting. Good Psychology? Not really.

 

Psychology pretty much comes down to "if this was legit, what would I do? What would I gain from doing this move or that move?"

 

I wouldn't say this is wrong, but Psychology is this, but also more. Some guys have been able to do what I call, again, a series of non-conflicting moves, and while not technically wrong, it just looks very, very awkward and unnatural. Ted Dibiase Jr. and Drew McIntyre suffer from this.

 

Psychology at its most simple level is having the match make sense. It's about having a good flow, and telling a good story. Bret Hart had fantastic psychology - even against similar opponents, he would change his "strategy" so to speak. He did have his combo finish, but it wasn't the be-all end-all of his ring work. Cena on the other hand went for a long, long time just taking a beating then hitting his 5 Moves of Doom. Hogan has been the same for a long time, too.

 

While I disagree with Ampulator's thinking on a lot of this, I agree that the combination of Orton, Cena and Triple H is plain awful. Remember their Triple Threat match on PPV last year? Cena stopped Triple H from doing a Pedigree through the Announce Table - to follow it up by putting Orton in the STF on the table... What does that achieve? He can't win on the outside, and the Pedigree would have hurt both H & Orton more than what he did. And he could have done the STF after the Pedigree.

 

Later in the match, Triple H has Orton in a Sharpshooter. Instead of breaking it, Cena puts the other half of Orton in a Crossface. To what end? There's no way he could win by doing it, and if anything increases Triple H's chances.

 

 

Triple H is not so much lazy... as he is limited. He only LOOKS lazy. He's never been a good brawler or a technician. He tries, but he's always been, at best, solid at those areas. It's really hard to had to have Bret Hart's or Ric Flair's versatility. But it's really hard to cover up for a guy like John Cena's later ringwork. To be fair, most of his Cena's later matches in his career were just god-awful against even guys like Shawn Michaels and Kurt Angle. I think even they knew it, because it ended up turning Angle face. His stuff with Edge or Jericho is just plain boring.

 

That, or John Cena has bad chemistry with not only Triple H, but also Randy Orton, Kurt Angle, and Shawn Michaels. That's quite few guys to have chemistry with. Edge and Jericho, it always feel like they work next to him rather than with him.

 

As for Triple H, he has never been that versatile... and I'm a fan of his ringwork. What he brings to do the table is solid fundamentals and consistency with good but not great psychology. That's why I liked his matches against Mick Foley, the Rock, and Steve Austin.

[RingofHonorGuard]

I've been watching a few WWE DVDs this week. I bought the Elimination Chamber DVD at Best Buy, and they had a buy one, get one free going. So I grabbed World's Greatest Managers.

 

Two things:

 

1) WWE dropped the ball on a second serious wave of Bill Goldberg sweeping the nation. In the elimination chamber match that Triple H won by beating Goldberg with the sledgehammer.... Big mistake in booking there. Was it because they didn't expect him to be -that- over, or the "non-home grown, no real push" effect? Regardless... Who knows what would have happened if Goldberg got the strap during that match... I will say this though, watch the match and tell me that spinebuster he hits on Randy Orton isn't the most impactful move you've ever seen. Not a Goldberg fan, but he had me hooked during that Chamber match, for sure.

 

2) WWE needs more managers. They've got a perfect opportunity here with DiBiase Jr. and Maryse. They should have Maryse get more involved. I think that's part of what's left wrestling so stagnant, not just lack of real competition. There's plenty of fleshing in certain angles and interviews, but it just seems like once the action hits the ring there's no depth. Realistically we're -never- going to have late 80's, early 90's WWF wrestling again, but how I wish. We need a Bobby Heenan in this era that can make us give a damn about the heels that are going against Hulk Cena.

 

Also...

 

As for Triple H, he has never been that versatile... and I'm a fan of his ringwork. What he brings to do the table is solid fundamentals and consistency with good but not great psychology.

 

Are you kidding me? Go back and watch some of his WCW and early WWF matches. He has the total package. The thing is, during the Attitude Era the style of pro wrestling changed in the mainstream. Triple H adopted a much more brawl-oriented style, and it got him more over than any fluid wristlocks and flashy transitions. H's can do it all in the ring, aside from the aerial artistry. Injuries and time have obviously taken their toll as well, which is why he isn't as quick these days.

[Self]

Am I the only one who is high on Orton both inside and outside of the ring...?

 

I like Randy Orton. I don't see much of him because RAW is a scheduling nightmare for me, but during the MitB match he was the guy my eye was drawn to the most. I love his mannerisms. He just sorta walked everywhere. He stood out from everyone else. I dug it. I try not to get involved with 'who is a good wrestler' or 'who has good psychology' debates, because so much of it is subjective and down to taste. I like watching Randy Orton wrestle, more so now that he's a babyface because his chinlocks (while valid heat spots) were a tad repetitive.