Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Aug 21, 2014 3:30:04 GMT -5
If there's one thing that can ruin Dean Ambrose for me it's everyone going into "it's sooo unfair, I hate you, this business sucks, they hate the fans, WWE is doomed they don't know what they're doing, I'm never watchin again!!!" mode if he isn't instantly made WWE Champ like...yesterday. We've kinda been there already with someone else. And look what happened when he finally got it. Just sayin'... Nothing happened, he got the belt and got injured. Whether the correct decision was made is a determination that's on hiatus. Making someone champ isn't the right call because they got the belt. That's determined by looking at how they do going forward. Unfortunately for Bryan his injury means we can't assess that yet. Ambrose has had one singles feud and people are surprised when people don't think he's ready for the main event? The worst thing for his career is push him too hard too fast. Reigns will get to the main event spot faster, but in two years time Ambrose will be there still - he won't.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 3:34:29 GMT -5
And look what happened when he finally got it. Just sayin'... Nothing happened, he got the belt and got injured. Whether the correct decision was made is a determination that's on hiatus. Making someone champ isn't the right call because they got the belt. That's determined by looking at how they do going forward. Unfortunately for Bryan his injury means we can't assess that yet. Ambrose has had one singles feud and people are surprised when people don't think he's ready for the main event? The worst thing for his career is push him too hard too fast. Im just saying all of hoopla over Bryan to get the belt, he does then goes into a crappy feud with Kane, his faher passes and gets injured and has to hnd over the title. Felt like one big jinx is all and I want aything to happen Ambrose as well.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 21, 2014 3:35:50 GMT -5
If there's one thing that can ruin Dean Ambrose for me it's everyone going into "it's sooo unfair, I hate you, this business sucks, they hate the fans, WWE is doomed they don't know what they're doing, I'm never watchin again!!!" mode if he isn't instantly made WWE Champ like...yesterday. We've kinda been there already with someone else. Thing is, WWE really didn't know what they were doing with Daniel Bryan.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Aug 21, 2014 3:55:00 GMT -5
Look at the main-stay main eventers of the last 20 years. How many of them were overnight successes?
Bret spent years as a tag wrestler and a couple as a singles wrestler in the midcards. HBK's - ditto the above HHH - joined 1995 not really main eventing until 1998 Cena - came in 2002(?) spent years doing that 'Basic Thuganomics' character and didn't become main event until 2005 Rock - couple of years from goofy face to main eventer via faction membership Austin - came in as the Ringmaster in 1995 - champ in 1998
There's a bazillion and one examples as to why, if you want someone to work in the main event, you don't push them to the stars about a month after people start to notice him. Doing what people propose for Ambrose is a sure fire way of ensuring that he's a flash in the pan. He's 28, he's still got 6 years to go before he's at the same age Austin was when he won his first title.
I feel really uneasy as I can feel this "make him champ or we riot" thing bubbling under the surface here. I love Dean Ambrose, he's my guy on the roster but people need to accept the absolutely worst thing that could happen to his career is being pushed to the stars now when he isn't ready.
History proves the (generally) right way to make a main-event level talent stick at the top for a significant period of time. A knee-jerk push based on a singles career that's barely 3 months old.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Aug 21, 2014 4:00:16 GMT -5
Look at the main-stay main eventers of the last 20 years. How many of them were overnight successes? Bret spent years as a tag wrestler and a couple as a singles wrestler in the midcards. HBK's - ditto the above HHH - joined 1995 not really main eventing until 1998 Cena - came in 2002(?) spent years doing that 'Basic Thuganomics' character and didn't become main event until 2005 Rock - couple of years from goofy face to main eventer via faction membership Austin - came in as the Ringmaster in 1995 - champ in 1998 There's a bazillion and one examples as to why, if you want someone to work in the main event, you don't push them to the stars about a month after people start to notice him. Doing what people propose for Ambrose is a sure fire way of ensuring that he's a flash in the pan. He's 28, he's still got 6 years to go before he's at the same age Austin was when he won his first title. I feel really uneasy as I can feel this "make him champ or we riot" thing bubbling under the surface here. I love Dean Ambrose, he's my guy on the roster but people need to accept the absolutely worst thing that could happen to his career is being pushed to the stars now when he isn't ready. History proves the (generally) right way to make a main-event level talent stick at the top for a significant period of time. A knee-jerk push based on a singles career that's barely 3 months old. While I agree to a certain extent, WWE has also gotten really bad in the past few years of not striking while the iron is hot/sabotaging (be it intentionally or unintentionally) a hot act's overness. Some patience should be required, but at the same time, crap like what's happened this year with Cesaro should never, ever happen. Can you imagine if they started to reel-in The Rock in late 1998 and told him to stop doing the eyebrow and the People's Elbow? That's the equivalent of what they've done with Cesaro, and I think that gives people a natural and understandable reason to worry about their other favorite guys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 4:02:16 GMT -5
It's just nice having faces to actually root for.
Also, there's no reason for Ambrose to be in WWE title feuds in the near future. He's fine.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Aug 21, 2014 4:22:28 GMT -5
They could try and make the midcard, you know....watchable again?
A midcard of Rollins, Ambrose, Sandow, Cesaro, Ziggler, Sheamus and one or two others wouldn't be half bad. Could make the IC title seem important even. Heaven forbid, I know.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 21, 2014 4:26:55 GMT -5
They could try and make the midcard, you know....watchable again? A midcard of Rollins, Ambrose, Sandow, Cesaro, Ziggler, Sheamus and one or two others wouldn't be half bad. Could make the IC title seem important even. Heaven forbid, I know. I agree with this. There are quite a few guys I like that I never really thought had main event potential at all, but I'd still like to see them have a chance to be entertaining and look competent in the ring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 5:37:49 GMT -5
but i'm not saying that he's far from Bryans level.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 5:49:33 GMT -5
He's one of the most supported wrestlers in the entire company certainly, but he's been given an A+ story with constant main events and better writing than most people who should fear being dropped into the storyline blackhole of the midcard.
Ambrose has both full office support and tremendous fan support, he may not be getting put in as distinct a future company head main event position as Reigns is (in terms of 'look how cool he is, he's taking down the big guns! Everything he does is comparable to every great! Watch out whoever has the title at Mania!') but he's on par with that in the segments where he can act tough/uniquely disturbed, and in situations where opponents need to damn near kill the guy to stop him. That and given how few wrestlers get multiple segment appearances per shows, there's no way to think Mr. Ambrose is being shafted at this point.
Ambrose is going to be a huge main eventer, he's not someone the company has dropped to midcard in favour of a variety of getting much less of a reaction than him. Ambrose is going to have plenty of time in the main event sun as long as the company keeps the consistency up with him/Rollins/Reigns. They're ALL going to be stand out MEs.
|
|
|
Post by sonofblaine on Aug 21, 2014 5:54:37 GMT -5
Dean Ambrose is Then, Now, Forever.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Aug 21, 2014 7:21:16 GMT -5
Look at the main-stay main eventers of the last 20 years. How many of them were overnight successes? Bret spent years as a tag wrestler and a couple as a singles wrestler in the midcards. HBK's - ditto the above HHH - joined 1995 not really main eventing until 1998 Cena - came in 2002(?) spent years doing that 'Basic Thuganomics' character and didn't become main event until 2005 Rock - couple of years from goofy face to main eventer via faction membership Austin - came in as the Ringmaster in 1995 - champ in 1998 There's a bazillion and one examples as to why, if you want someone to work in the main event, you don't push them to the stars about a month after people start to notice him. Doing what people propose for Ambrose is a sure fire way of ensuring that he's a flash in the pan. He's 28, he's still got 6 years to go before he's at the same age Austin was when he won his first title. I feel really uneasy as I can feel this "make him champ or we riot" thing bubbling under the surface here. I love Dean Ambrose, he's my guy on the roster but people need to accept the absolutely worst thing that could happen to his career is being pushed to the stars now when he isn't ready. History proves the (generally) right way to make a main-event level talent stick at the top for a significant period of time. A knee-jerk push based on a singles career that's barely 3 months old. While I agree to a certain extent, WWE has also gotten really bad in the past few years of not striking while the iron is hot/sabotaging (be it intentionally or unintentionally) a hot act's overness. Some patience should be required, but at the same time, crap like what's happened this year with Cesaro should never, ever happen. Can you imagine if they started to reel-in The Rock in late 1998 and told him to stop doing the eyebrow and the People's Elbow? That's the equivalent of what they've done with Cesaro, and I think that gives people a natural and understandable reason to worry about their other favorite guys. I think there's a big difference between pushing someone and keeping their momentum going because they're currently hot, and suddenly claiming that someone that just started getting good reactions is the next top face of the company and should be pushed to the moon.
|
|
|
Post by benstudd on Aug 21, 2014 23:05:33 GMT -5
What I love about the popularity of Ambrose is that there's no stupid catchphrase gimmicks attached to him so it's more organic.
And there's a cool edge about him that Bryan doesn't have.
But anyway about what they think of him, at least they are giving him the ball right now, even if he doesn't win all his matches. They must have been proud of what he did last monday. It was Stone Cold + workrate.
|
|
riseofsetian1981
King Koopa
"I met him fifteen years ago. I was told there was nothing left."
Posts: 10,323
|
Post by riseofsetian1981 on Aug 22, 2014 10:52:38 GMT -5
Aside from Daniel Bryan. What I love about Ambrose is that ideally he truly is the anti-corporate image of the WWE/Authority. A lunatic fringe in a wife beater, jeans, and a style that is all ove the place facing off against suits attempting to keep the status quo of "What's Best For Business."
When I saw him take down Kane, Rollins, and stood on top of the announcers table it just felt really organic. You had Kane who turned into a complete sell out in a suit, facing off against the Authority's chosen one, and then this guy who clearly doesn't have a care in the world except causing chaos. I loved the overall look of it.
If Ambrose can stay healthy and continue performing consistently(which he will). The WWE championship might come sooner than later.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Aug 22, 2014 10:58:40 GMT -5
Aside from Daniel Bryan. What I love about Ambrose is that ideally he truly is the anti-corporate image of the WWE/Authority. A lunatic fringe in a wife beater, jeans, and a style that is all ove the place facing off against suits attempting to keep the status quo of "What's Best For Business." When I saw him take down Kane, Rollins, and stood on top of the announcers table it just felt really organic. You had Kane who turned into a complete sell out in a suit, facing off against the Authority's chosen one, and then this guy who clearly doesn't have a care in the world except causing chaos. I loved the overall look of it. If Ambrose can stay healthy and continue performing consistently(which he will). The WWE championship might come sooner than later. Agree with that completely. He has an edge nobody else does. I detect an element of Cena about Bryan; nice guy, turns up with a smile, happy to be here. Which is great and didn't do Cena any harm clearly but Ambrose is....different and I like different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2014 12:06:56 GMT -5
There needs to be a face/face Daniel Bryan/Ambrose match/feud
Dueling Yes/Nope chants.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Aug 22, 2014 12:17:43 GMT -5
I love how we're at a stage now where the hottest feud every year seems to be WWE versus their own fans. We're the heels.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Aug 22, 2014 12:20:19 GMT -5
I love how we're at a stage now where the hottest feud every year seems to be WWE versus their own fans. We're the heels. What, in the sense that we're right but we're just dicks about it?
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Aug 22, 2014 12:26:58 GMT -5
What, in the sense that we're right but we're just dicks about it? I'd say we're more like JBL in 2004-05. Whatever the WWE throws at us to get us to mark out, we use our cynicism to worm our way out of it and hold onto our Armchair Booking World Title.
|
|
|
Post by Just call me D.j.m. on Aug 22, 2014 12:31:46 GMT -5
I'm seeing a lot of uses of the words "cool" and "edgy" with Ambrose as to why some prefer him over Daniel Bryan.
With Bryan, the word I use is "likable". For me, I see Daniel Bryan as a likable dude. He has none of those asshole qualities that wrestling fans fall in love with anti-hero babyfaces.
For me, I see Bryan as the most personable guy in WWE without any of the sports-entertainment sheen. He's GENUINELY LIKABLE and has unique quirks. He's not a perfectly corporate large than life superstar, and he's not a guy who is generally a prick, but only to people that are bigger pricks than him.
Oh, and Daniel Bryan is and has been the best professional wrestler in the Western World for the better part of a decade. That helps, too.
|
|