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

[Fantabulous]

Candyman, i hope you realise that you are part of the IWC. You're a wrestling fan posting on an internet forum about wrestling. The IWC aren't one big monolithic group with Scott Keith or Dave Meltzer or whoever as king - they (we) all have different opinions on all sorts of things. You can't just broadly go "they think ____".

 

But it's so much easier to dismiss an argument doing that.

 

As for 'why can't we all just wait and see how it pans out?' - are you seriously expecting everyone only comment on things from at least a year ago so that we can all comment with hindsight? Is instantly analysis and reaction not allowed? We'll sit back and look at the big picture once the big picture has happened. We might change our opinion over time, we might not. We'll see when we get there.

 

Again, much easier to dismiss an argument by just rolling out that cliché. And if the debate continues, you can just dismiss them as being too negative and quickly move on.

 

It's a good move on the surface for Matt Hardy to take WWE-sponsored rehab, but there isn't a great success rate for that plus I just don't have much faith in Matt completing rehab and staying clean. So not shocked that Punk loses to Triple H, even though it wasn't a clean loss, and is hurried into the next program before the rematch. I know, we'll get the usual crew literally crying that we should wait and see but, well, it's a familiar pattern with Triple H so it's not an unreasonable position to take.

[bigtplaystew]

I think Candyman's point was that maybe before knee jerk reactions and complaining about WWE booking... AGAIN ... let's maybe wait and see how it all plays out. If in a few months Del Rio is back in the middle of the card then we'll know they buried him. I highly doubt, being an experienced wrestling fan, that will be the case though.

 

For Instance: In the event that Del Rio finds himself with the title again, while Rock and Cena feud, the Punk/HHH conspiracy storyline might continue with Del Rio in the fold somehow throwing him into the top storyline going into WM28. If he has the belt on him, he's then in a prominent role in a top storyline and a champion, not hurting him whatsoever and in fact ELEVATING him. Del Rio sure looked dominant in his burial of Morrison last night. Looks fairly obvious to me that he's in for a bit of an attitude change after the loss to Cena.

 

 

Punk losing, for example, to Triple H the way that he did doesn't particularly hurt him if they continue to put him over like we saw last night.

 

Of course, we're all free to speculate. If I'm willing to be on the defensive with WWE's booking choices then certainly some of you gentleman should be able to criticize it.

 

But we're all grown ups and know these things. Some of us choose to attack each other rather than have a logical conversation. Some of us watch it and like it and tend to defend it, most likely to a fault. Some of us complain with incessant arrogance about everything they do yet continue to watch and post. Either way, WWE's happy because they have your awareness and your money most likely.

[Fantabulous]

It's also worth reiterating that when people start talking about the 'IWC', what they're really talking about is people who disagree with them. I don't know what it is, but you only ever get the 'IWC' meme brought up when someone wants dismiss an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Anyway, carry on people.

[bigtplaystew]

It's also worth reiterating that when people start talking about the 'IWC', what they're really talking about is people who disagree with them. I don't know what it is, but you only ever get the 'IWC' meme brought up when someone wants dismiss an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Anyway, carry on people.

 

Breaking news breaking news:

 

People on message boards fire backhanded insults at each other. I find it somewhat ironic that FANTABULOUS of all people is trying to call out people for snide remarks, but it is what it is I guess.

[Fantabulous]

The HiaC usually means a clean finish but I would expect 'The Conspiracy' to play a role and presumably cost Punk the match so Cena gets his win back and keeps the title because, naturally, Cena must keep the title. After all, we've got ratings to worry about.

 

Why does Henry beating Orton clean require a HiaC rematch? The only match at NoC that necessitates such a stipulation as Punk/Triple H and, shockingly, we're not getting that.

[mike b]

New nWo

 

Tell me you jest.

 

Then again could very well be.Nash,Miz,Truth and we need one more.

[juggaloninjalee]

New nWo

 

I think it will be a new version of the nWo which could be good.

 

Hopefully

 

Nash, Miz & Truth as a starting point would be good.

 

I don't think Nash, Miz, and Truth is a good nWo as of yet. The booking team would have to convince me of more.

 

Nash, Miz, and Truth being led by Vince McMahon in the shadows would be really good though. Vince could be their financial backer or something. I don't think Vince will be involved in the storyline though.

[Self]

It would take a lot for WWE to get me back as a viewer after the Punk deal took an unsatisfying turn, but a new New World Order is nowhere near the mark. Smacks unoriginal.

 

More Hugh Jackman might get me back. Watched a few clips. Dug 'em.

[milamber]

Anyone else think Zack Ryder and Colt Cabana should paired up as a tag team? The crowd reaction would be awesome.

[djthefunkchris]

Candyman, i hope you realise that you are part of the IWC. You're a wrestling fan posting on an internet forum about wrestling. The IWC aren't one big monolithic group with Scott Keith or Dave Meltzer or whoever as king - they (we) all have different opinions on all sorts of things. You can't just broadly go "they think ____".

 

But it's so much easier to dismiss an argument doing that.

 

As for 'why can't we all just wait and see how it pans out?' - are you seriously expecting everyone only comment on things from at least a year ago so that we can all comment with hindsight? Is instantly analysis and reaction not allowed? We'll sit back and look at the big picture once the big picture has happened. We might change our opinion over time, we might not. We'll see when we get there.

 

 

Again, much easier to dismiss an argument by just rolling out that cliché. And if the debate continues, you can just dismiss them as being too negative and quickly move on.

 

It's a good move on the surface for Matt Hardy to take WWE-sponsored rehab, but there isn't a great success rate for that plus I just don't have much faith in Matt completing rehab and staying clean. So not shocked that Punk loses to Triple H, even though it wasn't a clean loss, and is hurried into the next program before the rematch. I know, we'll get the usual crew literally crying that we should wait and see but, well, it's a familiar pattern with Triple H so it's not an unreasonable position to take.

 

The thing is, as soon as a show is over, we here "That sucked!" without knowing ANYTHING. There is always a RAW afterward that explains some things (sometimes they do, sometimes they don't).

 

These comments more times then not, prove to be totally off the mark. "Wow, talk about burrying him!" Remember that comment about Punk? Where is Punk now? Still in the Main Event and "Main Story".

 

I don't have a clue where this is going to go, and for anyone to act as though they do, is just asking NOT to be taken seriously... when it's almost a given how wrong they are about the whole thing.

 

The WWE has been said to plan out all their stuff MONTHS ahead of time. This has been said by virtually everyone outside of people trying to stay in "character". That alone makes the "Hotshotting the Title back on Cena because of ratings" a point that not many people will actually believe. You will have .... three, maybe four believe that. It's even hard to believe that the original poster actually believes that. This is also the same argument someone said about CM Punk losing the title and moving back down the card (stating it as a fact). Punk didn't move down the card, and now he's right back in the title picture.

 

I don't mind the comments though, because in this thread we have so many just like it, and maybe 10% (and that's actually giving alot more then what it really is) of the time, they were close.

 

EDIT: This for some reason, after reading it back it sounding alot more agressive then I mean it too... I mean it in more of a tongue in cheek comment and don't know how to fix that, so leaving the post as it is with my edit here to explain myself.

 

I don't think badly about either poster I quoted, and I love good debates. My overall point to both of these, was not to say they don't have valid points. My point about the "wait" is that it doesn't have to be months or even weeks afterward, it can be after another show explains it, and that didn't come off in my original post right (when I posted there is always a RAW afterward).

 

The poster that was all upset about Mark Henry winning was actually a post I dissagreed with moreso then either of these. I have no clue if anyone is right or wrong here, but I wanted to point out how comments right afterward are wrong so many times that it gets to be almost iconically funny to watch it unfold time after time (if you can sit back and watch it like I do).

[OldStingberg]

The thing is, as soon as a show is over, we here "That sucked!" without knowing ANYTHING. There is always a RAW afterward that explains some things (sometimes they do, sometimes they don't).

 

Here's the thing, though. Good entertainment isn't an either/or. It's not a case of either providing answers or asking new questions. Good entertainment delivers satisfying programming while also creating intrigue for future programming.

 

In my opinion, and it seems a lot of people's opinions considering the ratings, the WWE just isn't doing that right now. They're creating a lot of (some sort of) intrigue, but they're not also delivering satisfying programming while doing it. That's why people are saying this sucks and aren't sticking around to see where these stories end up.

 

And trust me, I really, really want to like wrestling. It was pretty much my entire childhood. One of my earliest memories involves me when I was no more than six years old trying to sneak out of my room while grounded so I could watch some late-80's WCW. I would come home from school and watch the Global Wrestling Federation. I had two of the exact same Sting action figures and I'd have matches between the two of them.

 

As crazy as it is for me to think about me saying this, I enjoyed The Sing-Off a lot more last night than I have the WWE since Money in the Bank, because the WWE just isn't doing a good job of delivering satisfying entertainment while also creating reasons to tune in each week, and that's a shame.

[bigtplaystew]

Here's the thing, though. Good entertainment isn't an either/or. It's not a case of either providing answers or asking new questions. Good entertainment delivers satisfying programming while also creating intrigue for future programming.

 

In my opinion, and it seems a lot of people's opinions considering the ratings, the WWE just isn't doing that right now. They're creating a lot of (some sort of) intrigue, but they're not also delivering satisfying programming while doing it. That's why people are saying this sucks and aren't sticking around to see where these stories end up.

 

And trust me, I really, really want to like wrestling. It was pretty much my entire childhood. One of my earliest memories involves me when I was no more than six years old trying to sneak out of my room while grounded so I could watch some late-80's WCW. I would come home from school and watch the Global Wrestling Federation. I had two of the exact same Sting action figures and I'd have matches between the two of them.

 

As crazy as it is for me to think about me saying this, I enjoyed The Sing-Off a lot more last night than I have the WWE since Money in the Bank, because the WWE just isn't doing a good job of delivering satisfying entertainment while also creating reasons to tune in each week, and that's a shame.

 

 

It's the age-old debate. Does wrestling "suck" or are your expectations too high? There's no right or wrong since it's all opinions.

 

Like me probably, You've been watching wrestling ever since you were a little kid, but it'll never be like that again. You were a small child. Things affect children differently and tend to have more of an impression on them. Even kids in their teen years. Their imaginations allow them to become more immersed in entertainment.

 

It's very common for people to watch something they loved as a youth and not find it nearly as compelling as they thought they would when they go back to it as an adult.

 

So while I understand that you want to be entertained. And in that, you wish WWE gave you a better product. We all want the best WWE product believe me. But I am entertained by wrestling just about every week. Does that mean I have no criticisms? Nope not at all. There's things I don't like. But when you hit the boards and see the same people being CONSTANTLY negative, constantly complaining and whining about the same few topics (low ratings & buyrates, bad booking, Cena sucks, etc.), you are generally dismissed by those of us who actually enjoy wrestling still.

[Zeel1]

So WWE.com announced The Miz and Truth's firing with the 'future endeavors' thing... I'm tempted to be a douche and ask if people think this one's legit too, like with Nash, but I'm too nice for that.

 

I wonder if they're just going to do that for every kayfabe firing from now on. Would be interesting. One cool thing would be if they did that but it wasn't part of a current storyline. Like they up and announce that Curt Hawkins or Tyler Reks or somebody that you could see being released were future endeavor'd, only to have them invade a few shows later trying to get back at the company that never gave them a chance.

 

Do that well enough, and people will never be able to tell if someone's actually been released or not... could be kind of fun having that kind of unpredictability.

[OldStingberg]

It's the age-old debate. Does wrestling "suck" or are your expectations too high? There's no right or wrong since it's all opinions.

 

Actually, it's kind of the opposite. My expectations are really, really low. Because of my history with wrestling (which I watched religiously until I was maybe 19 or 20, not just as some doe-eyed kid that didn't know better), I would totally be on board with watching it right now if it was merely mediocre. I've got a totally different standard of watchable for wrestling than I do for, let's say, Two and a Half Men. For me, personally, to get behind a standard sitcom, the sitcom would have to be really good, because it's just not something that interests me in general. But wrestling, for me to get behind that, it's only got to be mediocre. And the WWE isn't delivering that for me.

 

But I don't want to beat that point into the ground. With The Sing Off, Castle, and Monday Night Football back, I probably won't be watching much wrestling anymore unless things change, so it's probably best for me to just move on.

[djthefunkchris]

Actually, it's kind of the opposite. My expectations are really, really low. Because of my history with wrestling (which I watched religiously until I was maybe 19 or 20, not just as some doe-eyed kid that didn't know better), I would totally be on board with watching it right now if it was merely mediocre. I've got a totally different standard of watchable for wrestling than I do for, let's say, Two and a Half Men. For me, personally, to get behind a standard sitcom, the sitcom would have to be really good, because it's just not something that interests me in general. But wrestling, for me to get behind that, it's only got to be mediocre. And the WWE isn't delivering that for me.

 

But I don't want to beat that point into the ground. With The Sing Off, Castle, and Monday Night Football back, I probably won't be watching much wrestling anymore unless things change, so it's probably best for me to just move on.

 

I can't stand it when other people say it, and I hope I never did or ever will. You watch whatever you want to watch. That's why I put the edit on my answer, as I felt I come accross to harshly, and that wasn't my intention. I don't want anyone to feel that since they are complaining, they shouldn't watch the show. With this in mind, I would like to make a few points you might not have thought of, or it might not even pertain to you at all.

 

When I was VERY young, and watched wrestling, I don't think I was much different then the common six year old Cena fan crying when Punk beat him. I don't remember ever crying to be honest, but I do remember being upset when Snuka would lose, who was my favorite at the time. I was much older when I started liking people like Roddy Piper, in my teens at the least (I know, I'm giving away my age, oh well...). I liked him alot, rooted for him when he went up against Hogan, but... I wasn't a Hogan hater, I just liked Piper (the evil one) better. I thought Piper was pretty cool I believe. Snuka was still my favorite, and at Wrestlemania I was hoping he would steal the show (the first Wrestlemania, before we knew it would be a yearly thing). I actually was there, believe it or not. I was also a Ricky Dragon fan. As I grow older (and older), I don't take it as seriously, and I watch it tongue and cheek. Things still get me excited, but they always have.

 

Now, I know people don't think the same as they did back then, and I don't know if it's the IWC, or what it is... this forum we post our thoughts on. But if I go back and watch some of the stuff from regular TV that I watched back then, thinkin' how great it was... I'm completely let down by it. Don't get me wrong, the "Other" stuff was great, far as mic work (my opinion), in ring psychology (which I really don't think most people get.... Best way to sum up: You can have great psychology and only know two moves), and larger then life characters... But I believe it's still present today, just isn't as easy to see it as we age... but when I look at my nephew or niece, it's easy for me to see that they are very much so to them. When my son was younger (he's turning 21 in December), he had that same magical look in his eyes when watching wrestling as well, and when I finally got back to watching it, that look was even brighter (he could share it with me).

 

I don't know anyone I knew growing up that thought it was real, so I dismiss alot of conversation involved with "Who's better in the ring". When someone starts going "This is dumb, because the general fan's are going to think....." I can't take it seriously, because I know of less then a handfull of people that actually thought (or still think) wrestling was real. Meaning, out of thousands of people or more, that I have met in my life, less then 1% of them thought it was real... Now more then 90% of them think it's so fake that there is hardly any chance of anyone getting hurt, and even when they actually hit each other too hard (stiff), they still think they didn't hit them at all.

 

Then there is the "belief" that somehow someone with a title, that they aquired in a way that looked "opportinistic" to use a lighter word, makes them look better the longer they hold it. Like with this ADR situation... I just don't think he looked legit at all to start with (although I like him alot, far as the new guys are concerned), with the title. I felt he was Main Event material as soon as his ring announcer, announced him the first night he showed up... and I still do. However, that title win didn't feel deserved, and I know if I were six to 14 years old, I would have been upset with it, no matter if I liked him or not. The only way a Title reign looks legit, is if they win it justly, and defend it justly.... and that's not happening with heels working to get to that point. IF a heel win's the title justly, and defends it justly, he becomes a face. In other words, because of this, people will always be able to complain about short title reigns on heels, or how they won it, or how they lost it, etc. It's just going to be repeated as long as wrestling exists. In a conversation with "Smarks" you would think they would be "smart" enough to realise that, since most of your "general" audience does.

 

I could go on and on about these misconceptions. The one thing that keeps standing out to me is that it seems to me that the "Smarks" are the one's that are out of the "loop" and can't enjoy a show, because they care so much for a person that they like, instead of just watching and enjoying the show for what it is, a circus/soap opera, centered around a "fake" competition. In other words, the "Smarks" are the one's that get fooled over and over again, while the general public or general wrestling fan can enjoy it because they don't take it no where near as seriously, making the so called "Smarks" the new "Marks".

[juggaloninjalee]

I can't stand it when other people say it, and I hope I never did or ever will. You watch whatever you want to watch. That's why I put the edit on my answer, as I felt I come accross to harshly, and that wasn't my intention. I don't want anyone to feel that since they are complaining, they shouldn't watch the show. With this in mind, I would like to make a few points you might not have thought of, or it might not even pertain to you at all.

 

When I was VERY young, and watched wrestling, I don't think I was much different then the common six year old Cena fan crying when Punk beat him. I don't remember ever crying to be honest, but I do remember being upset when Snuka would lose, who was my favorite at the time. I was much older when I started liking people like Roddy Piper, in my teens at the least (I know, I'm giving away my age, oh well...). I liked him alot, rooted for him when he went up against Hogan, but... I wasn't a Hogan hater, I just liked Piper (the evil one) better. I thought Piper was pretty cool I believe. Snuka was still my favorite, and at Wrestlemania I was hoping he would steal the show (the first Wrestlemania, before we knew it would be a yearly thing). I actually was there, believe it or not. I was also a Ricky Dragon fan. As I grow older (and older), I don't take it as seriously, and I watch it tongue and cheek. Things still get me excited, but they always have.

 

Now, I know people don't think the same as they did back then, and I don't know if it's the IWC, or what it is... this forum we post our thoughts on. But if I go back and watch some of the stuff from regular TV that I watched back then, thinkin' how great it was... I'm completely let down by it. Don't get me wrong, the "Other" stuff was great, far as mic work (my opinion), in ring psychology (which I really don't think most people get.... Best way to sum up: You can have great psychology and only know two moves), and larger then life characters... But I believe it's still present today, just isn't as easy to see it as we age... but when I look at my nephew or niece, it's easy for me to see that they are very much so to them. When my son was younger (he's turning 21 in December), he had that same magical look in his eyes when watching wrestling as well, and when I finally got back to watching it, that look was even brighter (he could share it with me).

 

I don't know anyone I knew growing up that thought it was real, so I dismiss alot of conversation involved with "Who's better in the ring". When someone starts going "This is dumb, because the general fan's are going to think....." I can't take it seriously, because I know of less then a handfull of people that actually thought (or still think) wrestling was real. Meaning, out of thousands of people or more, that I have met in my life, less then 1% of them thought it was real... Now more then 90% of them think it's so fake that there is hardly any chance of anyone getting hurt, and even when they actually hit each other too hard (stiff), they still think they didn't hit them at all.

 

Then there is the "belief" that somehow someone with a title, that they aquired in a way that looked "opportinistic" to use a lighter word, makes them look better the longer they hold it. Like with this ADR situation... I just don't think he looked legit at all to start with (although I like him alot, far as the new guys are concerned), with the title. I felt he was Main Event material as soon as his ring announcer, announced him the first night he showed up... and I still do. However, that title win didn't feel deserved, and I know if I were six to 14 years old, I would have been upset with it, no matter if I liked him or not. The only way a Title reign looks legit, is if they win it justly, and defend it justly.... and that's not happening with heels working to get to that point. IF a heel win's the title justly, and defends it justly, he becomes a face. In other words, because of this, people will always be able to complain about short title reigns on heels, or how they won it, or how they lost it, etc. It's just going to be repeated as long as wrestling exists. In a conversation with "Smarks" you would think they would be "smart" enough to realise that, since most of your "general" audience does.

 

I could go on and on about these misconceptions. The one thing that keeps standing out to me is that it seems to me that the "Smarks" are the one's that are out of the "loop" and can't enjoy a show, because they care so much for a person that they like, instead of just watching and enjoying the show for what it is, a circus/soap opera, centered around a "fake" competition. In other words, the "Smarks" are the one's that get fooled over and over again, while the general public or general wrestling fan can enjoy it because they don't take it no where near as seriously, making the so called "Smarks" the new "Marks".

 

Very well said. I just wish we didn't argue so much here. The one comment that always bugs me is... I hated _____ because it was predictable.

[djthefunkchris]

Very well said. I just wish we didn't argue so much here. The one comment that always bugs me is... I hated _____ because it was predictable.

 

I don't mind it so much... it's just that it was ussually something totally different then what they predicted... For example "HHH will probably bury Punk!".. someone that said that can turn around and say "Wow, I called it!" although it wasn't anything close to what they called. Then again, I said it before, I don't think I have the same definition as bury as some, as I feel someone is burried when they look weak, look like they didn't have a chance, and a wrestler that isn't supposed to be that good does it to them. Losing to me, doesn't mean "burried". Someone wrestling "above" their card or overness position, and coming close to winning it several times, doesn't seem anywhere near being burried to me, just because they lost. To me it makes them look "almost" strong enough to take that guy out, and if they had the chance to do it again... they probably will.

[bigtplaystew]

Actually, it's kind of the opposite. My expectations are really, really low. Because of my history with wrestling (which I watched religiously until I was maybe 19 or 20, not just as some doe-eyed kid that didn't know better), I would totally be on board with watching it right now if it was merely mediocre. I've got a totally different standard of watchable for wrestling than I do for, let's say, Two and a Half Men. For me, personally, to get behind a standard sitcom, the sitcom would have to be really good, because it's just not something that interests me in general. But wrestling, for me to get behind that, it's only got to be mediocre. And the WWE isn't delivering that for me.

 

But I don't want to beat that point into the ground. With The Sing Off, Castle, and Monday Night Football back, I probably won't be watching much wrestling anymore unless things change, so it's probably best for me to just move on.

 

 

Then don't watch it and don't talk about it. You won't be missed. And I don't mean that as an insult, but if you think you're doing THE BOARD a favor by being negative about WWE in a massive percentage of your posts, let me tell that you are probably wrong. Just stop posting, move on with your life, and relieve yourself and us of the stress of having to argue with someone who admittedly doesn't care about or enjoy WWE.

 

I never got the constant complainers. MOST of the guys on wrestlings boards are wrestling fans who criticize and talk about things they see. This I understand, whether I agree with them or not. What I DONT get, are the constant negative nillies. They are not fans. They are just disruptive people who add nothing but frustration and arrogance to an otherwise fun conversation about something most of us enjoy and have a passion for.

 

Now I'm talking about boards in general, not this specific board or anyoen specific on it. I'm playing off of a few things OldStingBerg has said so I'm addressing it. But I'm not attempting a specific call out here. Just mentioning a frustration I have with a mindset many posters seem to display.

 

I know certain people take that "Freedom fighter" approach of, "I attack it because I love it and want it to be better!" I personally find this to be a bit silly myself but to each his own I guess. Keep beating up them boards, Che. You're a hero to us all.

 

You seem to be taking the "too cool for wrestling" route. Which is fine I guess. If you don't like it anymore then you fit it with around 90% of society. But again, then what compells you to hit the boards so hard?

[sebsplex]

Candyman, i hope you realise that you are part of the IWC. You're a wrestling fan posting on an internet forum about wrestling. The IWC aren't one big monolithic group with Scott Keith or Dave Meltzer or whoever as king - they (we) all have different opinions on all sorts of things. You can't just broadly go "they think ____".

 

Lord Meltzer approves of your post.

 

Like with this ADR situation... I just don't think he looked legit at all to start with (although I like him alot, far as the new guys are concerned), with the title. I felt he was Main Event material as soon as his ring announcer, announced him the first night he showed up... and I still do. However, that title win didn't feel deserved, and I know if I were six to 14 years old, I would have been upset with it, no matter if I liked him or not. The only way a Title reign looks legit, is if they win it justly, and defend it justly.... and that's not happening with heels working to get to that point. IF a heel win's the title justly, and defends it justly, he becomes a face. In other words, because of this, people will always be able to complain about short title reigns on heels, or how they won it, or how they lost it, etc. It's just going to be repeated as long as wrestling exists. In a conversation with "Smarks" you would think they would be "smart" enough to realise that, since most of your "general" audience does.

 

To be fair, I think most people do realise this. Heels are typically a heel because they're flawed. That's why they cheat, pay hired guns, abuse women, whatever - and when all is said and done, the face prevails. What initially intrigued me about the CM Punk angle was that the WWE were actively pushing him knowing that depending on whether you bought into his cause or not, he could be viewed as either a face or a heel.

 

Most of the frustration from ADR dropping the belt so soon seems to be due to the timing and lack of sustained build. After all, the booking made it fairly clear that once Cena got ADR in the ring, with no outside factors or shenanigans, he'd likely get the belt back. That's pretty much been the formula for every John Cena feud for a long time now. There just didn't seem to be the "need" for ADR to drop the gold when his reign and story had more mileage.

 

I never got the constant complainers. MOST of the guys on wrestlings boards are wrestling fans who criticize and talk about things they see. This I understand, whether I agree with them or not. What I DONT get, are the constant negative nillies. They are not fans. They are just disruptive people who add nothing but frustration and arrogance to an otherwise fun conversation about something most of us enjoy and have a passion for.

 

Strangely, blind fanboyism has the same effect. I guess it's a ying/yang thing.

[djthefunkchris]

 

 

To be fair, I think most people do realise this. Heels are typically a heel because they're flawed. That's why they cheat, pay hired guns, abuse women, whatever - and when all is said and done, the face prevails. What initially intrigued me about the CM Punk angle was that the WWE were actively pushing him knowing that depending on whether you bought into his cause or not, he could be viewed as either a face or a heel.

 

Most of the frustration from ADR dropping the belt so soon seems to be due to the timing and lack of sustained build. After all, the booking made it fairly clear that once Cena got ADR in the ring, with no outside factors or shenanigans, he'd likely get the belt back. That's pretty much been the formula for every John Cena feud for a long time now. There just didn't seem to be the "need" for ADR to drop the gold when his reign and story had more mileage.

 

I can agree with this to an extent, but look how I look at things just one time (if you don't already... I'm sure there are alot who do).

 

Not to long ago I had a debate with someone claiming the whole CM Punk summer storyline was over, or something along those lines. I don't remember who it was, and even if I did, there is no reason to single anyone out.

 

As I watch, I don't think of it as over at all... I see from that first Promo that brought attention to him, to now, all a part of the storyline. I can't help but to believe this when you look at the turn of events AFTER his promo. "I'd like to think when Vince is dead, it would get better, but....." and look what happens, the "Dufus" takes over. Nothing in this storyline (or even ADR's and Cena's) screams "Hotshotted" or worried about ratings or any of those things... To me it looks as if everything is going as scheduled. The only thing I can think of that anyone predicted accurately during this whole time, was the Sin Cara vs Sin Cara thing that seems to be developing. "WWE needed to put the belt on Cena because of ratings"... How can I believe that when it looks as if the story is going right on schedule, not too fast... but right on time. TO me, it looks like the Awesome Truth/Cena/ADR/Punk/HHH, etc... all is going to come together and be intertwined by the end of the year.

 

Now don't get me wrong, that's not to say people should "like" the storyline, but when you put "Open/Closed" on something that hasn't really closed.... We all know they plan this stuff out months ahead of time, why call it in a week as if it's over... I would rather here "I don't like the way this is going" rather then "WoW! They blew that story!" when it's not over to be blown yet.

 

Well, I'm sure you get what I'm saying. Hopefully anyone that doesn't can at least see how I'm looking at things. As I've said before, I'm not saying you have to like it, there are parts I'm not digging either... I have no idea why the need to fire Awesome Truth, unless it's to bring in an NWO type storyline that has them trying to take over or something, but I have no idea how that's going to work WWE style... TNA or WCW sure, but in WWE, I just don't know how that's going to play out so I'm not sure I like it at all yet.

 

I could talk about it very negatively and so forth, but I know I don't have a clue if even they are going that route or what's going to happen at all. It's all been hard to tell all year practically.

[bigtplaystew]

Strangely, blind fanboyism has the same effect. I guess it's a ying/yang thing.

 

You know what? I totally agree with this. Although I see far less blind fanboys than I see constant haters on the boards.

 

The problem is, just like politics, most of us are somewhere in the middle but slanted one way or the other. And we are all SOOOOO quick to pin each other as extreme haters or extreme fanboys when the reality is probably different.

[JackKnifed72]

I tend to avoid these conversations because I'm not really the type to complain if I don't like a storyline, but a few observations from the last few days of WW_ programming:

 

- Not sure what they are doing with Mark Henry...Not a dig at him, I like Mark Henry, but when a heel challenger cleanly pins a face champ it's usually to set up a different face stepping in to get the heel ... does this mean the 'Age of Sheamus' is upon us? Cena unifiying the belts? 'Cause Randy Orton coming back to beat Henry clean next month is kinda...dumb

 

- Not really a Del Rio fan but yeah, building him up to tear him back down that quick is odd. I know the "Good Guy" should win in the end but did Del Rio even make one defense of the belt? Even a tainted win? A count-out loss? Atleast Rikishi coulda run over Cena with Del Rio's car... something, anything ... IDK maybe something is going on backstage but seems like a waste

 

- The WW_ has spent the last year tailoring itself to the kiddies...then they go with a convoluted CM Punk 'Shoot promo'...Johny Ace & Kevin Nash conspiracy...HHH is the boss...is it the 'NEW' nWo or isn't it storyline that quite honestly I'd imagine totally and completely confuses and bores the living s*** out of anyone under the age of 14

 

 

Sadly as the Johnny Aces, Triple H's and Stephanie McMahons take over in Stamford, the 'art' of wrestling may die, leaving only "Sports Entertainment" in it's place...There seems to be no psychology, no storytelling in their product...just 'high spot...big turn...celebrity appearance...Cena or Orton wins...repeat formula..." Hopefully the whole CM Punk/Triple H story proves me, and many others, wrong but for now, RAW just looks like a variety show with some wrestling thrown in to keep us watching...I'll be on YouTube watching some old GCW or NWA clips until they get things fixed...

 

 

Of course that's just my opinion...I could be wrong

 

 

[Fantabulous]

You can have a heel champion who acts like heel and still remain a credible champion. The problem is that WWE, for whatever reason, almost never make their heel champion credible or seem like real threats. They have reigns punctuated with finishes and angles that have them look like jokes that you cannot possibly take seriously, as either a heel or a champion, and then they wonder why they don't move the ratings needle.

 

When WWE have a heel champion face a top babyface, the build to the match invariably involves the heel being booked in such a manner that they couldn't possibly be taken seriously as a champion and subsequently they have no heat as a heel because they've been portrayed in such an ineffective manner. And when it's a heel challenging the babyface champion, you get the exact same treatment where the heel is made to look like such a geek that you can't buy him as a challenger and he winds up meaning nothing for the numbers. There are exceptions to this, such as with Mark Henry recently, but those just that, exceptions. WWE, for whatever reason, are either unwilling or unable to give their heels any credibility or real heat.

 

That's why people tend to crap on WWE heel champions. They're generally portrayed as so ineffective that there's no reason to care about them or their title run. There's nothing to sink your teeth into because there's nothing of substance to them.

[justtxyank]

Johnny Ace is all about psychology and in-ring storytelling. Not sure why people think he's nothing but sports entertainment. This is a guy who was modeled himself after Japan and tried as hard as he could to implement as much of the Japanese model into US wrestling as he could. You know those near falls and false finishes that people like so much? Johnny Ace brought those to the US with WCW. He scolded WCW for not treating moves correctly.

 

I think people need to realize that the wrestling of old is dead. It is sports entertainment. That's all that's left and it will never come back. Accept it and try to enjoy the product for what it is or move on like I have. Don't look for people to blame either because there are too many too count.

[sebsy]

Not particularly important or exciting, but did anyone else notice the WWE couldn't even be bothered to get a new ring apron as the Womens Championship belt was still on the ring apron Sunday night