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

[ChrisKid]

RAW was good because the crowd was really into it, with the Yes! chants and stuff like that, the bits i didn't like were Jerry Lawler's heel (sounding) commentary, how can you not like the Yes! chants?

And the tag champs losing pretty quickly (like 2 minutes) other than that RAW was good

[ampulator]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="djthefunkchris" data-cite="djthefunkchris" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Perhaps... But I have a feeling Cena's going to stay exactly the way he is while they make money off of him losing over and over again at the PPV's.<p> </p><p> What I like about it, is the fact that it doesn't matter if they put him up against a face, a heel, whomever... There's going to be people rooting for whomever is against him, and that's where the money is.... No matter what, the Heel (or face) will get cheer's against Cena. </p><p> </p><p> Far as if he's a "Heel" character... No. He's playing a "Hated" face... I guess I'll never be able to get my point exactly through the way I was hoping to. I come to the conclusion after thinking about WWE creative and what they MUST know... Which is exactly how to make Cena a face everyone can get into... They have to know, which means they are purposely NOT doing it, and in doing so, mean's that Cena "Knows" as a character, and He's purposely NOT doing it... Because he is above us.</p><p> </p><p> Probably still not getting what I'm saying through, but I do see some people are giving it a bit more thought then at first.</p></div></blockquote><p> Except most people won't get it, because the kind of audience the WWE wants doesn't do subtlety.</p>

[soxfan93]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="ChrisKid" data-cite="ChrisKid" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>RAW was good because the crowd was really into it, with the Yes! chants and stuff like that, the bits i didn't like were Jerry Lawler's heel (sounding) commentary, how can you not like the Yes! chants?<p> And the tag champs losing pretty quickly (like 2 minutes) other than that RAW was good</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Really? Because I thought it was awful. Bryan/Kofi was good, Punk/Henry was okay, Cena's promo was solid, but that was it. Everything else felt like a waste of time.</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>Except most people won't get it, because the kind of audience the WWE wants doesn't do subtlety.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Exactly. There's no subtlety here. WWE doesn't know how to do "grey area-" type of things. Cena's a face, Lesnar's a heel, Bryan's a heel. That's how the storylines are written.</p><p> </p><p> It's like making the case that Sheamus is a heel because he took advantage of Bryan. Not even close, he's a face.</p>

[BurningHamster]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="soxfan93" data-cite="soxfan93" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Really? Because I thought it was awful. Bryan/Kofi was good, Punk/Henry was okay, Cena's promo was solid, but that was it. Everything else felt like a waste of time.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Something good, something okay and something solid in amongst the waste of time? That is above average for WWE.</p>

[soxfan93]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="BurningHamster" data-cite="BurningHamster" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Something good, something okay and something solid in amongst the waste of time? That is above average for WWE.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Fair enough. But just because it's "above average for WWE" doesn't make it good.</p>

[LoNdOn]

<p><strong>Spoiler below</strong></p><p><strong>

</strong></p><p>

<span style="color:#FFFFFF;">Antonio Cesaro debuted on Smackdown!</span></p><p><span style="color:#FFFFFF;">

</span></p><p>

I was at the event live. Only me and my friend reacted by cheering.</p>

[soxfan93]

I read about that. I can't wait to see Smackdown.

[BurningHamster]

Fair enough. But just because it's "above average for WWE" doesn't make it good.

 

Eh, people have crummy judgment and their opinions are all wrong. What can you do though?

[Moe Hunter]

It's like making the case that Sheamus is a heel because he took advantage of Bryan. Not even close, he's a face.

 

He also purposely kicked a referee in the face.

[soxfan93]

He also purposely kicked a referee in the face.

 

He was screwed, therefore, he had a reason. He was simply holding the referee accountable for his actions. It wasn't like The Awesome Truth attacking Chioda (iirc) back in October, which was for absolutely no reason other to "act heelish."

[juggaloninjalee]

Hogan in the 80s used to gauges eyes, and sometimes beat up a referee if he felt he got screwed.

[soxfan93]

Exactly, that's how wrestling works. Faces can act heelish and get cheered, heels can act face-ish and get called out for "sucking up".

[djthefunkchris]

To me it's pretty obvious they are keeping both Sheamus and Bryan in a state of where they could go either way at any minute. Right now Bryan is the heel, Sheamus is the face, but it could easily swap without either one of them changing much. This is WWE, where face/heel divide hasn't been strong in 30 years anyways.

[Hashasheen]

To me it's pretty obvious they are keeping both Sheamus and Bryan in a state of where they could go either way at any minute. Right now Bryan is the heel, Sheamus is the face, but it could easily swap without either one of them changing much. This is WWE, where face/heel divide hasn't been strong in 30 years anyways.

 

... I'm sorry, what?

[soxfan93]

... I'm sorry, what?

 

Yeah, really. Somebody hasn't been watching the product.

[Astil]

Compared to the 80s, I agree with DJ actually.

[soxfan93]

Compared to the 80s, I agree with DJ actually.

 

By that you mean that they didn't ride around with each other? The product itself is exactly the same: face vs. heel, very rarely overlapping.

[Astil]

By that you mean that they didn't ride around with each other? The product itself is exactly the same: face vs. heel, very rarely overlapping.

 

Faces act like heels. Heels act like faces. Didn't happen in the 80s

[Self]

That's not a WWE thing. That's a modern society thing. It's not even that modern. Everyone loves a bad boy.

 

Personally, I don't necessarily consider attacking a referee a 'heelish' thing to do. I consider a heel action to be something done with the intention of being booed. If The Miz kicks a referee in the face for no reason, he's doing it to be booed. If Sheamus kicks a referee in the face because he just got screwed by said referee, he's doing it to be cheered. It's not about the action, it's all about context, and the person doing it. I don't believe Steve Austin acted heelish during his entire run on top, because everything he did was intended to make drunken rednecks and rambunctious teens go "Yay".

 

The Daniel Bryan/Sheamus thing is one of those situations where fans aren't doing what they're supposed to. On paper, Daniel Bryan is doing heelish things in my eyes, but the fans aren't going with it. There's no muddled intent. It's just not working out like WWE scripted it, which happens sometimes in all entertainment.

[Astil]

That's not a WWE thing. That's a modern society thing. It's not even that modern. Everyone loves a bad boy.

 

Personally, I don't necessarily consider attacking a referee a 'heelish' thing to do. I consider a heel action to be something done with the intention of being booed. If The Miz kicks a referee in the face for no reason, he's doing it to be booed. If Sheamus kicks a referee in the face because he just got screwed by said referee, he's doing it to be cheered. It's not about the action, it's all about context, and the person doing it. I don't believe Steve Austin acted heelish during his entire run on top, because everything he did was intended to make drunken rednecks and rambunctious teens go "Yay".

 

The Daniel Bryan/Sheamus thing is one of those situations where fans aren't doing what they're supposed to. On paper, Daniel Bryan is doing heelish things in my eyes, but the fans aren't going with it. There's no muddled intent. It's just not working out like WWE scripted it, which happens sometimes in all entertainment.

 

What's your opinion of Cena playing to the boos?

[djthefunkchris]

By that you mean that they didn't ride around with each other? The product itself is exactly the same: face vs. heel, very rarely overlapping.

 

They stay on the edge, where it wouldn't take anything to slip from one side to the other. A "medium" heel/face divide at best. You still have good guys and bad guys, just the line isn't as clear at times.

 

@Self, you don't have tons of T-Shirts and stuff made if you didn't plan for it. They know exactly what they are doing here, they know more then we do, and they probably expected that reaction being where they were. I don't expected they knew how big the reaction would be, but everyone is playing up to it perfectly (or playing down to it to encourage it more).

 

So yeah... The divide is weak at best. It's all a shades of grey right now.

[Self]

At times there has been an element to Bret Hart's "very very pro Canadian" gimmick to John Cena. He's simultaneously trying to appeal to one section of the crowd, while turning against another. Only unlike Bret, both sections of the crowd are in the same building at once. So it's trickier. Trying to be the hero that audiences want to see victorious, while convincing another audience to pay to see him get his ass kicked.

 

Although personally, I consider Cena to be babyface, in that 99% of his actions are dedicated to being liked. It's just failing with certain members of the crowd.

[Astil]

At times there has been an element to Bret Hart's "very very pro Canadian" gimmick to John Cena. He's simultaneously trying to appeal to one section of the crowd, while turning against another. Only unlike Bret, both sections of the crowd are in the same building at once. So it's trickier. Trying to be the hero that audiences want to see victorious, while convincing another audience to pay to see him get his ass kicked.

 

Although personally, I consider Cena to be babyface, in that 99% of his actions are dedicated to being liked. It's just failing with certain members of the crowd.

 

I like that metaphor, although it's comments like "you think today is the day I'll snap" and such that make me see what DJ's saying. not agree per se, but I can at least see it.

[djthefunkchris]

At times there has been an element to Bret Hart's "very very pro Canadian" gimmick to John Cena. He's simultaneously trying to appeal to one section of the crowd, while turning against another. Only unlike Bret, both sections of the crowd are in the same building at once. So it's trickier. Trying to be the hero that audiences want to see victorious, while convincing another audience to pay to see him get his ass kicked.

 

Although personally, I consider Cena to be babyface, in that 99% of his actions are dedicated to being liked. It's just failing with certain members of the crowd.

I was actually talking about the Daniel Bryan situation, but I'll comment on that again, lol.

I like that metaphor, although it's comments like "you think today is the day I'll snap" and such that make me see what DJ's saying. not agree per se, but I can at least see it.

 

/nod. He teases to show the side that HE knows (and thus fore, WWE creative has to know) the crowd wants to see... Exactly what would make everyone cheer for his character.

 

Yet he tells us in the next phrase "Well, that's not me. I will overcome. I will rise above." So taking what Self said as the goal, he is basically telling the kids and women or whomever is the people cheering him on "I'm still your guy" and at the same time telling everyone else "Your opinion doesn't matter, I'm better then YOU!" I don't see it changing till the whole crowd is booing him.

 

That's why if I were WWE creative right now, I would put John's head on a silver platter for everyone over and over again. The people that cheer him I don't ever see changing, at least not all at once. It's going to be a perfect formula, a gold mine even, to have him lose to every major star they can find til' it become unbelievable. Basically do a MVP to him in a much bigger scale. He doesn't have to lose on the TV show, but at the PPV's, this is the time for them to have him lose.

 

They could have this going on at every PPV, and continue the stories with other's like Punk and Bryan without having to worry about if they can sell tickets or not.... as Cena getting his butt kicked by big name stars should sell the tickets for them. Then finally bleeding over into the title stories when they have no more people to beat up on Cena.

 

EDIT: To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if they did a story line where a few people want to kick Cena's butt, and they have them go one on one to see who gets to beat up Cena next.

[Hyde Hill]

Can't beat Cena too much or many of his fans will stop believing in him. With both the Bryan and Cena thing it really depends how much credit you are giving creative or not.