|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 22, 2010 23:45:57 GMT -5
The "John Cena" era.
When will it end? It's been going on for 5 years now, non-stop. The same thing, the same booking, the same guy, the same moves, the same gimmick. I can't take much more of it. When will they ACTUALLY go out and look for their new "guy"? We begged for it, we got it - somebody new FINALLY came along and won the WWE title. That man was Sheamus. Some of us were delighted, some of us were appalled. But we can all agree that it was somebody fresh, correct?
Anyways, it seems that WWE always go back to the same thing whenever they get to something good. I can't take it anymore, the Bret Hart storyline started off good, what happens? they insert John Cena into it. The Celtic Era was just kicking off, what happens? They insert John Cena into it and have it end. Have it be ALL about him, there was barely any mention of Sheamus losing last night or Sheamus full-stop. Other than he had a concussion and couldn't make it. What's the deal? The kids won't stop buying the John Cena merchandise just because he isn't carrying a belt over his shoulder. Just keep him on Raw and have him actually act like a human being, if that is in any way, humanly possible. They had their "money match" this year at Wrestlemania with Cena and Batista and they go ahead and ruin one of their up and comers in totally unneccessary fashion for the sake of... what? To put yet ANOTHER thing resolving around John Cena? Because I can't think of anything.
John Cena this, John Cena that. 5 years later, it will be the exact same thing. They'll always find something to resolve around John Cena, even if he doesn't have the title. I don't care for this feud, I wanted to see Sheamus vs Triple H for the WWE Championship at Wrestlemania. That isn't the smark in me, that's the wrestling fan in me. By all means do Batista vs Cena but keep Sheamus' momentum and championship out of it.
And while you're at it, keep Bret Hart out of it too.
|
|
|
|
Post by RatedRKoffee on Feb 23, 2010 0:44:45 GMT -5
Cena is like a thousand times more worthy of main eventing mania than Sheamus is. Workrate, buyrate, storyline, no matter how you slice it Cena is the better choice.
|
|
The Possum
Unicron
JBL stands for "Just Beat a Lizard".
Posts: 3,013
|
Post by The Possum on Feb 23, 2010 0:47:04 GMT -5
The John Cena era ended in 2007. Sure, he's the top baby face, but he's not the be all end all of the product anymore. It's to a point where I don't get too upset over Cena winning now. I wish they'd have less meaningless title reigns begin and end involving him, but they're not shoving him down our throats nearly as hard as they used to.
|
|
|
|
Post by "The Rated XXX Superstar" Jed on Feb 23, 2010 0:50:26 GMT -5
Cena is like a thousand times more worthy of main eventing mania than Sheamus is. Workrate, buyrate, storyline, no matter how you slice it Cena is the better choice. This. And I'm as anti-Cena as they come. Look, I'm all for pushing new stars, but Musclebound Conan O'Brien Sheamus ain't it. Kofi? Yes. Miz? Yes. Christian? Yes. But not Sheamus. |
|
|
|
Post by kingbookermark on Feb 23, 2010 0:53:46 GMT -5
Last I checked we were still living in the Age of Orton!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 23, 2010 1:17:15 GMT -5
Cena is like a thousand times more worthy of main eventing mania than Sheamus is. Workrate, buyrate, storyline, no matter how you slice it Cena is the better choice. If he's THAT marketable, he won't need a title to get buys. Cena vs Batista is supposed to be a HUGE match right? So how come you need to insert them both into every damn thing going on right now? Sheamus shouldn't be main eventing Wrestlemania, Not in the main match, but in the third last match or so. Before Cena/Batista and Jericho/Edge. THAT is where his place in the card vs HHH should have been. Sheamus could have had a good program with Triple H. Insert Hornswoggle in there and have Sheamus crush him, take him out of action to set Triple H off. THAT could have kicked off the storyline. The title? Sheamus had it. The workrate? Sheamus has it and would have had a great match with Triple H. Believe me, Cena nor Batista needed the belt to do this feud. Sheamus absolutely needed it and WWE title needed him. Because looking back at the records, you have Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Steve Austin, Bret Hart... And Sheamus. THAT could have changed, if only they booked him better. Which they didn't, so his title reign and the title's prestige looks like an absolute joke right now, unless he somehow gets it back, which I highly doubt. The poor guy can't even get his rematch, nevermind his belt. |
|
|
|
Post by The Deadly Snake on Feb 23, 2010 1:32:36 GMT -5
To be honest, WWE's product needs to be changed. And not in the way WWE wants it. They cut out their edgier parts of their product. That's understandable. But what they have left is a product that's very bland, and quite frankly, too old.
They are basically using a WWF 80's style product that WWF themselves abandoned around the early 90's. It's the 80's style, but updated with the trappings of the current times and current wrestlers. But it doesn't change the fact that it feels like the WWF 80's style product.
WWF has several options to me, that they can change their product. They can add a bit of Lucha Libre, add a bit more Realistic wrestling, or add a bit more Modern wrestling.
They have the wrestlers to make one or all these product changes. I can't see WWE being hurt by a slight product change. Everyone knows they need it.
|
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Feb 23, 2010 1:32:55 GMT -5
Look, I'm all for pushing new stars, but Musclebound Conan O'Brien Sheamus ain't it. Kofi? Yes. Miz? Yes. Christian? Yes. But not Sheamus. I'll give you Miz, but Kofi has yet to do anything to suggest to me he deserves to ever make it higher than a Mysterio-like upper-midcard special attraction, and Christian isn't a "new star": he's a competent old hand and broomstick worker, but he's been around a decade and he's likely to stay in a similar spot for another decade. |
|
|
|
Post by RatedRKoffee on Feb 23, 2010 1:33:52 GMT -5
You put the top guys in the top spot at mania. It's just that simple.
|
|
|
|
Post by molson5 on Feb 23, 2010 1:43:43 GMT -5
Cena's only 32. He's a little young to be put out to pasture. I think fans these days have a little ADD.
|
|
andrewgilkison
Bubba Ho-Tep
Sound of 300lbs of crap hitting the fan?
Posts: 558
|
Post by andrewgilkison on Feb 23, 2010 2:05:28 GMT -5
Sheamus vs. Triple H would have no real heat or interest, especially stacked up against matches like Undertaker vs. Michaels II and Cena vs. Bastista, or even Edge vs. Jericho. So with that in mind, it was a smart move to go with the "Cena wins the WWE title, but Batista screws him out of it and now Cena wants revenge" storyline. In fact, they should've bypassed Sheamus altogether and just went with this storyline to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Deadly Snake on Feb 23, 2010 2:09:29 GMT -5
Sheamus vs. Triple H would have no real heat or interest, especially stacked up against matches like Undertaker vs. Michaels II and Cena vs. Bastista, or even Edge vs. Jericho. So with that in mind, it was a smart move to go with the "Cena wins the WWE title, but Batista screws him out of it and now Cena wants revenge" storyline. In fact, they should've bypassed Sheamus altogether and just went with this storyline to begin with. I have to say this: I didn't care much about Sheamus. I didn't like him or hate him. He was just.... there. He was just your typical big guy to me. Cena's only 32. He's a little young to be put out to pasture. I think fans these days have a little ADD. Although that's a fair point, but he's already seriously slowing down. He has lost a lot of his earlier Athletcism, but his in-ring work hasn't gotten that much better. His matches are barely watchable, not because they are botchfests, but because it's same kind of match he has every night. And not the same GOOD match. Just average run-of-the-mill match. He produces the same amount of quality no matter which guy he's with... his matches against HBK and Kurt Angle aren't all that much than his matches against Orton. |
|
|
|
Post by Super Duper Dragunov on Feb 23, 2010 5:05:38 GMT -5
You put the top guys in the top spot at mania. It's just that simple. exactly. i can't believe how upset people are with Sheamus losing and Cena being the in the title program. i would rather Cena v. Batista than HHH v. Sheamus for the title. and i am one of the biggest anti-cena people on here as well. Sheamus will be fine. Cena is this generations Hogan, and he's STILL around, proclaiming to STILL rule. |
|
|
|
Post by joey joe joe junior shabadoo on Feb 23, 2010 7:54:58 GMT -5
I am generally very anti-cena but I'd much rather him be in a title match than Triple H again!
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319 
|
Post by mrjl on Feb 23, 2010 7:57:31 GMT -5
WWF has several options to me, that they can change their product. They can add a bit of Lucha Libre, add a bit more Realistic wrestling, or add a bit more Modern wrestling. Lucha Libre sucks. Pure low impact. |
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Feb 23, 2010 9:34:36 GMT -5
I've said this a number of times. Cena-Batista didn't NEED the title for their feud, but the WWE needed them to have it.
They knew they were booking this streak vs. career match at Wrestlemania, and despite all logic the WWE steadfastly maintains that a title match must main event.
The only match that has a prayer (although I think it will even fall short) of holding the audiences attention, and having some heat after what is sure to be 30 minutes of the biggest non-stop drama thrill ride since, well last year's Taker-HBK match, is John Cena vs. Dave Batista.
Sending Sheamus and Triple H out there is sending them out to fail. Sending even Chris Jericho and Edge out there is sending them out to fail. Jericho and Edge might put on a five star wrestling clinic, but the crowd just won't be invested enough after being drained of their energy after Taker-HBK.
I'm not sure even Dave and Cena can hold their attention after that, but they certainly have the best chance. THAT is why they have the belt.
|
|
Big L
Grimlock
Posts: 13,883
|
Post by Big L on Feb 23, 2010 9:38:14 GMT -5
Cena is like a thousand times more worthy of main eventing mania than Sheamus is. Workrate, buyrate, storyline, no matter how you slice it Cena is the better choice. Yea ur right |
|
barley96
Dennis Stamp
This is the biggest Mickie James mark
Posts: 4,170
|
Post by barley96 on Feb 23, 2010 9:42:53 GMT -5
Not that i like Sheamus, because I don't, but I thought that Cena vs Batista would have been more logical as a special attraction match instead of a match for the WWE title.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sparvid on Feb 23, 2010 10:12:10 GMT -5
Cena is like a thousand times more worthy of main eventing mania than Sheamus is. Workrate, buyrate, storyline, no matter how you slice it Cena is the better choice. If he's THAT marketable, he won't need a title to get buys. Cena vs Batista is supposed to be a HUGE match right? This is why I disagreed with Undertaker being in the title match in 2007 and 2008. Why have Taker in the title match when you can have two matches on the card instead: an Undertaker Wrestlemania match AND a World title match? |
|
adamclark52
El Dandy
I'm one with the Force; the Force is with me
Posts: 8,139
|
Post by adamclark52 on Feb 23, 2010 10:23:52 GMT -5
You weren't around in the 1980's were you?
|
|
