|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Sept 3, 2012 16:22:47 GMT -5
Looking ahead to Night of Champions, I wonder what exactly would be the booking strategy if John Cena thwarts CM Punk's nearly year-long reign. Punk, because of his spot as WWE champion, is the de facto credible main-event heel of the company (despite the fact that his heel turn really doesn't seem to be getting over with WWE's TV audiences). While an argument could be made for Brock Lesnar, he's on TV so infrequently and likely to be kept as a special attraction fighting other special attractions (like Triple H and perhaps the Undertaker if the rumoured Wrestlemania match comes to fruition) that he's only the top main-event heel when he's around... which is pretty much once in a blue moon.
So, say Cena beats Punk. Then what? Yes, because Punk was the former champion, there will be rematches (obviously in a Hell in a Cell Match in October and then who knows what at Survivor Series). Maybe Punk gets the belt back, but then the WWE title is the hot potato being hot-shotted between two guys, and we saw enough of that last year (Punk, Mysterio, Cena, Punk, del Rio, Cena, del Rio, Punk). Now, you could do Rock/Cena at the Royal Rumble for the title, but that doesn't change the fact that there are no credible heels in the meantime for the champion to face.
I would be in favour of Dolph Ziggler being a slimy yet proficient main-event heel who gets a decent run with the championship, but that still leaves him in the chickens*** heel role that WWE has been booking many of their villains as in recent years. Yes, most heels are cowards, but what makes a credible top heel so entertaining as a bad guy is knowing that he doesn't have to take advantage of screwy finishes or run-ins to win because he's talented enough (in terms of wrestling ability, strength, or toughness) to win cleanly but doesn't anyway. A credible main-event heel like this is Triple H from 1999-2000. When he was the Game, he was that damn good, but he still had help from Chyna, Stephanie McMahon, DX, and others to help him get the victory. It was also by working as a credible main-event heel which brought him up to the level of the main-event as a permanent fixture (which still persists today, albeit perhaps as too permanent of a fixture).
The lack of a credible main-event heel reminds me of WCW in 1996. Before the New World Order angle took off, you had guys like the Giant and Ric Flair who were heels who could main-event, but they didn't dominate the top faces per se. It was Hogan's heel turn that put the NWO angle even further over than it already did when Hall and Nash 'invaded' WCW, because it shifted the alignment between faces (who beforehand were perceived to be more 'powerful') and heels. John Cena is really the only person going today who has enough star persona to radically alter the face/heel alignment of WWE.
This isn't meant to be another 'turn John Cena heel' thread, but look at the power dynamics between faces and heels currently.
Faces:
John Cena
Sheamus
Triple H
The Rock
Randy Orton
Rey Mysterio
The Undertaker
Sin Cara
Ryback
Brodus Clay
Heels:
CM Punk
The Big Show
Brock Lesnar
Alberto del Rio
Daniel Bryan
Dolph Ziggler
Kane
Cody Rhodes
Damien Sandow
Mark Henry
At least to me, the power dynamic from these examples is eschewed heavily towards the faces in terms of main-event attention. Yes, WWE has traditionally been a babyface-dominant company, but your top face is really only as good as your top heel (and vice versa). And while Punk is playing the role of top heel, in terms of main-event credibility (as a heel) and the overall face/heel dynamics, there's something lacking. Something lacking that another John Cena title win won't fix.
Agree or disagree?
|
|
|
|
Post by Djm Doesn't Find You Funny on Sept 3, 2012 16:25:08 GMT -5
I honestly don't think the conversation needs to go much further beyond this. I mean, that's all there is to it. WWE is a babyface dominant company and always has been. It's the company where the superhuman babyface always beats the dastardly heel/monster heel...unless it's HHH.
I'm not sure that this warrants much discussion because it's never been different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Todd Pettengill on Sept 3, 2012 16:34:45 GMT -5
A possible way to make heels seem like monsters would be to take some guys off the road/off TV for a while & repackage them as serious threats to the face champion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Sept 3, 2012 16:42:40 GMT -5
A possible way to make heels seem like monsters would be to take some guys off the road/off TV for a while & repackage them as serious threats to the face champion. That's pretty much how the last monster heel run came about. Mark Henry was off for a little bit, then came back and just started killing everyone. And it got over huge. |
|
Some Guy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,808
Member is Online
|
Post by Some Guy on Sept 3, 2012 16:44:06 GMT -5
Kane isn't a heel
|
|
|
|
Post by muzzle on Sept 3, 2012 17:13:25 GMT -5
He was 5 minutes ago. He changes more than Big Show for gods sake. |
|
|
|
Post by Todd Pettengill on Sept 3, 2012 17:14:22 GMT -5
A possible way to make heels seem like monsters would be to take some guys off the road/off TV for a while & repackage them as serious threats to the face champion. That's pretty much how the last monster heel run came about. Mark Henry was off for a little bit, then came back and just started killing everyone. And it got over huge. Yeah, it just makes sense. Then there's time to create motivation for the character & he gets a fairly clean slate. |
|
|
|
Post by misconduct was wrong on Sept 3, 2012 18:56:14 GMT -5
He was 5 minutes ago. He changes more than Big Show for gods sake. I thought this was explained many times over. Kane is not heel nor face. He is his own classification. Kane. On topic. I know they've been mostly a face driven company. But lack of good heels is at a peak right now. When you have Del Rio facing Sheamus for what, five or six ppvs in a row, then you know something's wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Sept 3, 2012 20:35:07 GMT -5
they don't lack for credible heels so much as their most credible heel is a guy the fans don't want to boo, and the only others are either boring as hell (Show, ADR) or in a midcard comedy angle (D-bry).
|
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Sept 3, 2012 20:40:18 GMT -5
They don't have credible heels because the faces are booked as unstoppable superheroes.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTBartman on Sept 3, 2012 21:05:51 GMT -5
He was 5 minutes ago. He changes more than Big Show for gods ]sake. Kane is neither heel nor face, Kane is Chaotic Neutral. |
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 3, 2012 22:39:04 GMT -5
He was 5 minutes ago. He changes more than Big Show for gods sake. I thought this was explained many times over. Kane is not heel nor face. He is his own classification. Kane. On topic. I know they've been mostly a face driven company. But lack of good heels is at a peak right now. When you have Del Rio facing Sheamus for what, five or six ppvs in a row, then you know something's wrong. When Kane is doing goofy comedy spots, he's a face. |
|
|
|
Post by flatsdomino on Sept 3, 2012 22:43:44 GMT -5
I honestly don't think the conversation needs to go much further beyond this. I mean, that's all there is to it. WWE is a babyface dominant company and always has been. It's the company where the superhuman babyface always beats the dastardly heel/monster heel...unless it's HHH. I'm not sure that this warrants much discussion because it's never been different. Yeah, but it's at the point where there's not even credible CHALLENGERS to put over the superman faces. Which is why, as has been mentioned, Del Rio vs. Sheamus has been happening for like half a year now. |
|
|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Sept 4, 2012 0:03:01 GMT -5
I honestly don't think the conversation needs to go much further beyond this. I mean, that's all there is to it. WWE is a babyface dominant company and always has been. It's the company where the superhuman babyface always beats the dastardly heel/monster heel...unless it's HHH. I'm not sure that this warrants much discussion because it's never been different. Yeah, but it's at the point where there's not even credible CHALLENGERS to put over the superman faces. Which is why, as has been mentioned, Del Rio vs. Sheamus has been happening for like half a year now. I agree with this. I mean, in the 1980s, from 1987 until 1992 let's say, Hogan could work with the following people: Andre the Giant, Rick Rude, Mr. Perfect, Randy Savage, Sgt. Slaughter, Sid Justice, the Undertaker, Ric Flair, Earthquake, the Genius, etc. While none of those guys were going to necessarily leave WWF champion, they at least look credible as contenders for TV, house shows, and PPVS. And this isn't even counting tag matches, six-man tags, and elimination series matches either. During the Attitude Era, from 1997 until 2001, Steve Austin could work with the following people: The Undertaker, Kane, Mankind/Dude Love, Shawn Michaels, the Rock, Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Triple H, Rikishi, the Big Show, Ken Shamrock, Test, the Big Boss Man, Bret Hart, Owen Hart, the British Bulldog, Vader, Goldust, etc. What's interesting to me is observing that during these time periods the reliance on stables/factions/groups means that you can rotate people in and out of angles to keep feuds fresh. Hogan had the Heenan Family, Jimmy Hart's crew, Mr. Fuji's group, and others to play off of. Likewise, Austin during his time had the Hart Foundation, the Nation of Domination, D-Generation X, the Ministry, and the Corporation to occupy his time. Now look at today. John Cena as the face of WWE has: CM Punk, Brock Lesnar (part-time), the Rock (part-time), Sheamus, Kane, Daniel Bryan, the Big Show, Alberto del Rio, and... And he's already feuded with many of these guys for months at a time. Whether or not it's a question of roster size, roster depth, star power, or the decline of putting wrestlers into stables or factions, after running through CM Punk (again), and the likely tag match that will happen at Survivor Series (Cena/Rock vs. Punk/Lesnar), who's Cena as the top guy in WWE going to face? Unless, of course, a midcard talent who hasn't really been a main-eventer, like Ziggler, Rhodes or Barrett, gets a mega-push. I think why guys like Hogan, Austin, and yes, even Cena, get over as big as they do is because they were pushed organically (relatively, at least). They're the guys who last. The Ultimate Warriors, the Billy Gunns, and the Bobby Lashleys of the world don't last as long on top. But it seems that guys who get over organically have their heat siphoned off so someone else can get over or stay over (Bryan in the case of Sheamus and AJ) or taken away from them altogether when they're made to look like chumps (Ryder and the Miz). So when you make someone who's getting over organically bump his head on the glass ceiling repeatedly (because of ego, politics, business, or whatever, who knows), you're left with no choice but the forced mega-push. And that can often blow up in your face if the mega-push fizzles out (Lashley, but Batista too) or fans don't take to it (John Cena in 2005-2007). There are two clear divisions in WWE. One is the natural line of faces and heels. But the faces always look so dominant and invulnerable that no heel ever really gets to get an upperhand. This is why today's heel in WWE is typically the chickens*** heel. Hogan had monster heels, Austin had tough guy or authority heels, Cena has chickens*** heels. The other line is between the main-eventers and everyone else. No one today would buy Cena vs. Drew McIntyre. But in the 1980s they'd buy Hogan vs. Bad News Brown and in the 1990s they'd buy Austin vs. Val Venis. The difference between spots on the pecking order is huge today. All of this combined might be the reason why there aren't any credible main-event heels. Well, except Cena himself, of course, given how fans react to him. But that's another matter altogether. |
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Sept 4, 2012 1:01:41 GMT -5
The chickenshit shit heels are fun but I agree that they're over used, especially in today's no kayfabe whatsoever envronment. Why should we care that Dolph held the tights? That kind of thinking is at least twenty years out of touch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Sept 4, 2012 1:03:47 GMT -5
They could push people instead of Del Rio, that could help.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Portable Stove on Sept 4, 2012 1:11:52 GMT -5
The WWE doesn't know how to balance properly anymore. That's the issue with having writers.
There's no way to book a heel credibly without suddenly hurting the top faces, and there's no way to book a top face suddenly without hurting a heel. It's a ridiculous notion yes, but it's a credo that they follow. For some reason, "Show-Off" Dolph Ziggler can't go on a tear in the WWE without making everyone else look bad, so they have to have him be thwarted by Sheamus at every turn until he doesn't look like a threat. Why do I want to see Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus again, if Del Rio was already pinned clean as a sheet two months ago? They had to INVENT a reason for us to be interested in a third match, and even then, there's NOTHING important going into it.
Not to mention, they feel the need to cut the rug out from under anyone at any point in time. Remember when people said that Cody Rhodes was going to have a breakthrough year late last/early this year? What's he doing now? Jack Swagger, someone who could be doing so much more, was just taken off of TV for some reason after doing absolutely nothing since losing the US title.
In fact, I can say the only heel that's booked to be competent or credible at this point in time, ignoring the ones who the fans actually want to cheer more than boo, is Damien Sandow. Considering Sandow's only been around for a few months, it's damn near depressing.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 4, 2012 1:19:47 GMT -5
The WWE doesn't know how to balance properly anymore. That's the issue with having writers. There's no way to book a heel credibly without suddenly hurting the top faces, and there's no way to book a top face suddenly without hurting a heel. It's a ridiculous notion yes, but it's a credo that they follow. For some reason, "Show-Off" Dolph Ziggler can't go on a tear in the WWE without making everyone else look bad, so they have to have him be thwarted by Sheamus at every turn until he doesn't look like a threat. Why do I want to see Alberto Del Rio vs. Sheamus again, if Del Rio was already pinned clean as a sheet two months ago? They had to INVENT a reason for us to be interested in a third match, and even then, there's NOTHING important going into it. Not to mention, they feel the need to cut the rug out from under anyone at any point in time. Remember when people said that Cody Rhodes was going to have a breakthrough year late last/early this year? What's he doing now? Jack Swagger, someone who could be doing so much more, was just taken off of TV for some reason after doing absolutely nothing since losing the US title. In fact, I can say the only heel that's booked to be competent or credible at this point in time, ignoring the ones who the fans actually want to cheer more than boo, is Damien Sandow. Considering Sandow's only been around for a few months, it's damn near depressing. Damien Sandow is another example of one guy tearing through everyone and making them look bad. Tyson Kidd, Yoshi Tatsu, Zack Ryder, Justin Gabriel have all been made to look like chumps for Sandow's push. And the worst offense is the match with Christian; not the match being short, but that they've booked Sandow like an angry monster. Sandow should be a thinking man who outsmarts his opponents and catches them with a roll up or a finisher after they miss a corner splash or an aerial move or something. Instead he's angrily bum rushing people with elbows and knee strikes. |
|
