Sometimes, I wish that they would just be consistent.

[Viva]

Like, Randy Orton kicked Shane McMahon in the brain. He kicked vince in the brain. He RKO'd Steph just to make HHH mad.


Now they're best friends and he's whats best for the company.

Besides the whole freakin crowd chanting boring every time he wrestles a match, like, it doesn't even make sense. They beefed a lot. Now it's all cool? Why? Did Randy Orton donate to charity in the McMahon family name? Did he make them baked alaska?

No. It was just decided and not really explained.

They could have put anybody in that spot. Ziggler? Why not Ziggler. At least Ziggler didn't terrorize the entire freakin' family like NOT EVEN THAT LONG AGO.

CMON MAN.

[Deleted]

Pretty sure they explained this, at least to some extent. I think HHH said he doesn't like Orton personally, but he's best for business. I also want to say they said something about the McMahons gaining respect for Orton because of what he'd done to them. But that part could be me making stuff up.

["Cane Dewey" Johnson]

Dec 21, 2013 16:11:01 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

But that part could be me making stuff up.

Hey, don't beat yourself up over it. WWE makes stuff up all the time just because, so if you're misremembering things, it's nowhere near as bad as what McMahon and company do.

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 16:11:01 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

Pretty sure they explained this, at least to some extent. I think HHH said he doesn't like Orton personally, but he's best for business. I also want to say they said something about the McMahons gaining respect for Orton because of what he'd done to them. But that part could be me making stuff up.

That's not an explanation. That'd be like if I went to my worst enemy's house and started hanging out with him all the time. And he was like, "I thought you hated me, dude." and I was like, "Yeah, well. It's what's best for business."

WHY IS IT BEST FOR BUSINESS?

[Deleted]

Dec 21, 2013 16:17:42 GMT -5 Viva said:

Dec 21, 2013 16:11:01 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

Pretty sure they explained this, at least to some extent. I think HHH said he doesn't like Orton personally, but he's best for business. I also want to say they said something about the McMahons gaining respect for Orton because of what he'd done to them. But that part could be me making stuff up.

That's not an explanation. That'd be like if I went to my worst enemy's house and started hanging out with him all the time. And he was like, "I thought you hated me, dude." and I was like, "Yeah, well. It's what's best for business."

WHY IS IT BEST FOR BUSINESS?

It's best for business because in kayfabe Randy Orton is the ideal champion. He has the look, he puts on great matches, as a face he's very over, he can be a great heel when given good stuff to work with. That's why Triple H puts his personal feelings aside.

[saintpat]

Dec 21, 2013 16:17:42 GMT -5 Viva said:

Dec 21, 2013 16:11:01 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

Pretty sure they explained this, at least to some extent. I think HHH said he doesn't like Orton personally, but he's best for business. I also want to say they said something about the McMahons gaining respect for Orton because of what he'd done to them. But that part could be me making stuff up.

That's not an explanation. That'd be like if I went to my worst enemy's house and started hanging out with him all the time. And he was like, "I thought you hated me, dude." and I was like, "Yeah, well. It's what's best for business."

WHY IS IT BEST FOR BUSINESS?

That, too, has been explained, and they addressed the past bad blood.

You're basically saying I wish they'd do something ... that they already did.

Perhaps they should do a special 4-hour Raw, with two hours recounting the entirity of past dealings between Orton and Triple H and then a two-hour explanation of something they already explained.

[Boo!]

You can't tie wrestling down to that kind of logic. Everyone has 'wronged' someone along the way. You can't explain it, it's just what needs to happen.

[spagett]

To be fair that's wrestling.

For as long as I can remember former bitter rivals have become friends if they're both heel or babyface. Macho Man and Ricky Steamboat were teaming together a few month after Savage crushed his throat with the ring bell.

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 16:21:09 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

Dec 21, 2013 16:17:42 GMT -5 Viva said:

That's not an explanation. That'd be like if I went to my worst enemy's house and started hanging out with him all the time. And he was like, "I thought you hated me, dude." and I was like, "Yeah, well. It's what's best for business."

WHY IS IT BEST FOR BUSINESS?

It's best for business because in kayfabe Randy Orton is the ideal champion. He has the look, he puts on great matches, as a face he's very over, he can be a great heel when given good stuff to work with. That's why Triple H puts his personal feelings aside.

So, if they say things out loud, they're true. Even if they're false.

When's the last time Randy Orton has put on a great match? He looks like the guy that wants to be a biker but he's not biker enough. A poser if you will. He's not a face right now. So being over as a face is useless. And he's boring as a heel.

They want to straddle this line of kayfabe and reality. That's okay, I can get behind that. But when you just say things that are the opposite of reality to make your storyline work, it's stupid. If the crowd was behind it, maybe, and I get that they're doing this to get heel heat.

But what this storyline is doing is just giving people matches they don't want to generate heel heat. How is that 'good for business?'

If a majority of my crowd was like, "Hey, I really like it when you play that song." and then I played every single song except that song and when they asked me why I didn't play that song, I was like, "Well, this song is not my most popular, but it's certainly the one I like best. It's got a good groove, and I think it's a great song to finish my set with. It's what's good for business." At what point am I going beyond "What's best for business." and just doing what pisses my fanbase off?

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 16:25:06 GMT -5 saintpat said:

Dec 21, 2013 16:17:42 GMT -5 Viva said:

That's not an explanation. That'd be like if I went to my worst enemy's house and started hanging out with him all the time. And he was like, "I thought you hated me, dude." and I was like, "Yeah, well. It's what's best for business."

WHY IS IT BEST FOR BUSINESS?

That, too, has been explained, and they addressed the past bad blood.

You're basically saying I wish they'd do something ... that they already did.

Perhaps they should do a special 4-hour Raw, with two hours recounting the entirity of past dealings between Orton and Triple H and then a two-hour explanation of something they already explained.

What I'm telling you is that it hasn't been explained. It's been glossed over lazily with a nonsensical attempt to tie it together. It doesn't make sense. On any level.

And what I'm getting at, is that with this kayfabe-reality angle they keep trying to accomplish, the LEAST that you can do, is acknowledge when it doesn't make any god damn sense.

Triple H is like, man, I hate this guy, but he is what we need. Doing so while ignoring the crowd. And fans. Now that is for the heel heat, I'd reckon. HOWEVER, why are they basing the main storyline around this? If people don't want to see this guy in the main event, and they are making it known by chanting boring at him when he fights people, then HOW is it best for business?

[Deleted]

I don't think, "It's wrestling," should really just be a catch-all excuse for bad writing. There's no reason that wrestling can't have at least semi-competent writing, which a lot of the time it couldn't.

The Orton / Triple H thing? That could have worked. A month prior to SummerSlam they could have had some situation that would've seen Orton help Triple H out of a jam (maybe due to some variety of mutual enemy) or something, with Triple H while not necessarily liking him being a little more inclined to keep him in his good graces as a result.

Then there's just basic level stuff, like when Khali was put on the shelf by Kane, who turned face while he was gone then Khali's return match was teaming with him. Sure, certain allowances need to be made and a lot of things are written on the fly, but with the slightest bit of thought put into things (which is asking a lot from Vince these days, I know) everything could make tons more sense than it does.

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

Long term consistency in wrestling, not just WWE, is pretty much impossible. The best we can hope for is maybe the odd tongue-in-cheek stab at a plot tieup, like Kane discussing his history with Dr. Shelby. But if something'll get a crowd to cheer or boo, bookers will run with it regardless of how much it contradicts itself.

It's the nature of the beast, as there's too much of a conflict between trying to maintain a coherent narrative and also wanting to sell as much tickets/PPV buys as possible right then and there. If the fans are willing to pop for (and tune in to see) Joe Grappler disregarding his long standing hatred for Johnny Brawler and saving him from Evil Heel Stable In Black, then he's gonna run down the aisle with a chair.

[Sparkybob]

Dec 21, 2013 17:31:29 GMT -5 Viva said:

Dec 21, 2013 16:21:09 GMT -5 @robvancam said:

It's best for business because in kayfabe Randy Orton is the ideal champion. He has the look, he puts on great matches, as a face he's very over, he can be a great heel when given good stuff to work with. That's why Triple H puts his personal feelings aside.

So, if they say things out loud, they're true. Even if they're false.

When's the last time Randy Orton has put on a great match? He looks like the guy that wants to be a biker but he's not biker enough. A poser if you will. He's not a face right now. So being over as a face is useless. And he's boring as a heel.

His match with Bryan last Monday night? The 2 matches with Cody this year? His match with Goldust? The no DQ match with Bryan? The MITB match if you count that. Orton has put on great match this year and when he is one he's one of the best in the business at working a match.

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 17:46:41 GMT -5 Sparkybob said:

Dec 21, 2013 17:31:29 GMT -5 Viva said:

So, if they say things out loud, they're true. Even if they're false.

When's the last time Randy Orton has put on a great match? He looks like the guy that wants to be a biker but he's not biker enough. A poser if you will. He's not a face right now. So being over as a face is useless. And he's boring as a heel.

His match with Bryan last Monday night? The 2 matches with Cody this year? His match with Goldust? The no DQ match with Bryan? The MITB match if you count that. Orton has put on great match this year and when he is one he's one of the best in the business at working a match.

I genuinely feel like he's only as good as who he's wrestling. I think that could be true for a lot of people in the WWE, but those guys you named are always putting on great matches no matter who they're wrestling.

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 17:39:40 GMT -5 Lizuka #BLM said:

I don't think, "It's wrestling," should really just be a catch-all excuse for bad writing. There's no reason that wrestling can't have at least semi-competent writing, which a lot of the time it couldn't.

The Orton / Triple H thing? That could have worked. A month prior to SummerSlam they could have had some situation that would've seen Orton help Triple H out of a jam (maybe due to some variety of mutual enemy) or something, with Triple H while not necessarily liking him being a little more inclined to keep him in his good graces as a result.

Then there's just basic level stuff, like when Khali was put on the shelf by Kane, who turned face while he was gone then Khali's return match was teaming with him. Sure, certain allowances need to be made and a lot of things are written on the fly, but with the slightest bit of thought put into things (which is asking a lot from Vince these days, I know) everything could make tons more sense than it does.

This is a more eloquent way of saying what I'm trying to say. Instead of trying to bulldoze us with sketchy logic, they can just put a little effort into not making a stupid thing work.

[Sparkybob]

Dec 21, 2013 17:50:25 GMT -5 Viva said:

Dec 21, 2013 17:46:41 GMT -5 Sparkybob said:

His match with Bryan last Monday night? The 2 matches with Cody this year? His match with Goldust? The no DQ match with Bryan? The MITB match if you count that. Orton has put on great match this year and when he is one he's one of the best in the business at working a match.

I genuinely feel like he's only as good as who he's wrestling. I think that could be true for a lot of people in the WWE, but those guys you named are always putting on great matches no matter who they're wrestling.

That's implying that Orton is a stiff in the ring and all those guys were just wrestling by themselves. I have a hard time believing someone who witness all those matches and felt, yup Orton played no part in those matches being great/entertaining.

[Starshine]

MY problem is that WWE often take a tell, don't show approach to how they tell a story. I understand that they had Triple H make some remark about how he still didn't like Orton. But it doesn't really hold true when you see Orton and the McMahons hugging and celebrating together. If they had a more cold relationship it would make sense. But they're not following the story they want us to believe which is the problem.

It's the same deal with Cena going on about how he couldn't lose to the Rock and then blowing off the loss as if it never mattered. Then going on about how the loss affected him so badly that he'd almost given up on life later on.

They're lazy in that they don't want to commit to their own stories. They're happy to just tell us what we're meant to think instead of properly conveying it to us.

[Viva]

Dec 21, 2013 17:55:55 GMT -5 Sparkybob said:

Dec 21, 2013 17:50:25 GMT -5 Viva said:

I genuinely feel like he's only as good as who he's wrestling. I think that could be true for a lot of people in the WWE, but those guys you named are always putting on great matches no matter who they're wrestling.

That's implying that Orton is a stiff in the ring and all those guys were just wrestling by themselves. I have a hard time believing someone who witness all those matches and felt, yup Orton played no part in those matches being great/entertaining.

What i'm saying is, with all of the guys you named, Goldust, Cody Rhodes, Danielson. You could subtract Orton and add anybody and it would be an entertaining match. You cannot say the same for Randy Orton.

[Bang Bang Bart]

Dec 21, 2013 17:44:52 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

Long term consistency in wrestling, not just WWE, is pretty much impossible. The best we can hope for is maybe the odd tongue-in-cheek stab at a plot tieup, like Kane discussing his history with Dr. Shelby. But if something'll get a crowd to cheer or boo, bookers will run with it regardless of how much it contradicts itself.

It's the nature of the beast, as there's too much of a conflict between trying to maintain a coherent narrative and also wanting to sell as much tickets/PPV buys as possible right then and there. If the fans are willing to pop for (and tune in to see) Joe Grappler disregarding his long standing hatred for Johnny Brawler and saving him from Evil Heel Stable In Black, then he's gonna run down the aisle with a chair.

Now I wanna see a tag team consisting of Joe Grappler and Johnny Brawler.

[rnrk supports BLM]

I really think HHH/Orton's kayfabe history adds to the current angle, rather than detracting from it. The whole subtext seems to be that Hunter pegged Orton as the future of the business a decade ago, so even now, in spite of all the horrible things Orton's done to him, Randy being at the top is a matter of pride for HHH because it reflects well on him and proves he was right all along.

It's not supposed to be about what's best for business, that's supposed to be the flimsy excuse corporate heel HHH is using because he thought Orton would make it and Bryan wouldn't and doesn't want to be proved wrong.