|
Post by BiloxiParish on Dec 5, 2012 12:32:40 GMT -5
Bryan is the best person to take the loss, he's the kind of talent that can lose constantly against anyone and still maintain (and even increase) his overness, a very rare quality. I think that's a pretty bad excuse. Any superstar with enough talent, basically anyone good enough to main event, can stay over despite a many losses. The reason that it's always someone like Daniel Bryan is because the WWE is still has the notion that a superstar needs to be a certain size before he can be believable as dominant. But CM Punk has been champion for over a year..
|
|
|
Post by The Peoples Elbow on Dec 5, 2012 12:38:35 GMT -5
DAMN IT! :/
|
|
|
Post by The Peoples Elbow on Dec 5, 2012 12:44:13 GMT -5
DAMN IT!
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Dec 5, 2012 12:46:08 GMT -5
I think that's a pretty bad excuse. Any superstar with enough talent, basically anyone good enough to main event, can stay over despite a many losses. The reason that it's always someone like Daniel Bryan is because the WWE is still has the notion that a superstar needs to be a certain size before he can be believable as dominant. But CM Punk has been champion for over a year.. Being a champion for over a year has nothing to do with being booked as dominant. While Punk has held the title for a long time, he still loses quite a lot for a champion. At least compared to someone like Sheamus, who's had more wins this year than Punk's had matches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 13:11:44 GMT -5
CONSARNIT!
|
|
|
Post by DrBackflipsHoffman on Dec 5, 2012 14:15:27 GMT -5
PISH POSH!
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Dec 5, 2012 15:21:51 GMT -5
So glad it's not real serious and he can recover within weeks instead of the half year special.
|
|
Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Dec 5, 2012 15:44:00 GMT -5
But CM Punk has been champion for over a year.. Being a champion for over a year has nothing to do with being booked as dominant. While Punk has held the title for a long time, he still loses quite a lot for a champion. At least compared to someone like Sheamus, who's had more wins this year than Punk's had matches. Who has beaten Punk, outside of Ryback in tag matches? Even then, the few Punks losses were done BECAUSE he's been champ over a year. Too much monotony otherwise.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Dec 5, 2012 15:59:02 GMT -5
Being a champion for over a year has nothing to do with being booked as dominant. While Punk has held the title for a long time, he still loses quite a lot for a champion. At least compared to someone like Sheamus, who's had more wins this year than Punk's had matches. Who has beaten Punk, outside of Ryback in tag matches? Even then, the few Punks losses were done BECAUSE he's been champ over a year. Too much monotony otherwise. It's not like I can remember every loss he's had, but they're there. And I wasn't complaining about it. I'm fine with CM Punk's booking for the most part. And my post wasn't even really about CM Punk. He's just an example to support my theory on why Daniel Bryan is always the one taking the pin in matches.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 5, 2012 16:01:23 GMT -5
JANET! I think I'm doin this wrong.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Dec 5, 2012 17:13:05 GMT -5
Bryan is the best person to take the loss, he's the kind of talent that can lose constantly against anyone and still maintain (and even increase) his overness, a very rare quality. But you know who's kind of the ultimate example of exactly that? Kane. Dude comes back from ANYTHING. It's just that the WWE bookers cannot get over their weird size thing. Me, I dunno why people are worried about Bryan. It's going to be worse watching all the Shield members looking like schmucks every time they're in there with Ryback. To be fair, nearly everyone looks like a schmuck against Ryback. That's kind of the appeal of him, that he just steamrolls guys.
|
|
|
Post by jimpeaner on Dec 5, 2012 21:20:31 GMT -5
The ONLY way I can see them getting out of this if Punk's out for months would be to have Cena beat Ziggler for the briefcase, have Rock win the Royal Rumble and then challenge Cena for the belt. So what would happen with Rock's already announced title match at the Rumble? That's already been set. It would then be Cena/Rock at the Rumble for the belt, but if Punk is truly injured and needs the belt removed, that'd mean Ryback is taking it at TLC setting up Ryback/Rock, or they have Ziggler cash in NOW and have Ziggler/Cena's ladder match at TLC be for the belt, maybe throw Ryback into the match as well and remove Punk from the card. There was no rule set that Ziggler can't cash in his MITB before he has to put it on the line at TLC, there could be a storyline there. i cansee that happening actually
|
|
|
Post by jimpeaner on Dec 5, 2012 21:22:22 GMT -5
how about a Royal Rumble match where the WWE TITLE is up for grabs! there IS precedence
|
|
|
Post by jimpeaner on Dec 5, 2012 21:35:11 GMT -5
Honestly, I can see DB taking the loss since WWE seems to see him as rather expendable when it comes to taking losses. Bryan is the best person to take the loss, he's the kind of talent that can lose constantly against anyone and still maintain (and even increase) his overness, a very rare quality. like Jericho then?
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Dec 5, 2012 21:45:17 GMT -5
So glad it's not real serious and he can recover within weeks instead of the half year special. Or EWR when it takes you 18 months to recover.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 21:58:34 GMT -5
Bryan is the best person to take the loss, he's the kind of talent that can lose constantly against anyone and still maintain (and even increase) his overness, a very rare quality. like Jericho then? But what happened with Jericho? He got tired of being booked that way and left in 2005. It's silly to essentially punish someone for being over enough to lose by having them lose all the time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2012 22:04:20 GMT -5
But what happened with Jericho? He got tired of being booked that way and left in 2005. It's silly to essentially punish someone for being over enough to lose by having them lose all the time. When did Jericho say him leaving (in 2005, 2010, or 2012) had something to do with how he was being used? I thought it was due to wanting more time off and because of Fozzy.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Free Moon-Down with Burger on Dec 5, 2012 22:06:33 GMT -5
But what happened with Jericho? He got tired of being booked that way and left in 2005. It's silly to essentially punish someone for being over enough to lose by having them lose all the time. Uh. What? Jericho left because of being burnt out.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 5, 2012 22:35:36 GMT -5
Wasn't there some rule about the champ having to defend the title every 30 day?
|
|
nm
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,084
|
Post by nm on Dec 5, 2012 23:00:56 GMT -5
Wasn't there some rule about the champ having to defend the title every 30 day?
|
|