Woo
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,279
|
Post by Woo on Aug 28, 2014 16:55:46 GMT -5
Well ignoring the fact that Earthquake debuted as the hottest new heel and that rather than be built up to face the champion, Warrior, Hogan got to be the one to defeat him (undermining Warrior's reign and also doing what HHH does these days when he tries to get the rub from the new over talent like Punk, Bryan, Lesnar, Shield and syphon thier heat away), I don't think he made Earthquake look at all strong in that feud. He kicked out of his finisher and no-sold in like a douche (Rumble 91) and within a year Earthquake was relegated to a tag team guy with his singles career in the WWE over. No sold like a douche. I meant "No-sold it like a douche." I know Hogan always no sold finishers, like the Earthquake, the Perfect Plex and worst of al the Tombstone Piledriver, but I still hate him for it. For the record though Earthquake didn't debut against Hogan which was mentioned earlier. It seems like Hogan wanted to feud with the hot new heel and probablly asked to be put over by him, when fueding your top heel against your face champion would have made more sense really.
|
|
Woo
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,279
|
Post by Woo on Aug 28, 2014 17:11:10 GMT -5
John Cena1) Ryback 2) Wade Barrett 3) Bray Wyatt 4) Edge (you could argue he eventually helped make Edge, but taking the belt off him at the Rumble was a disgrace, though you could blame HHH for that for using Cena to make himself main event) 5) Dolph Ziggler 6) Umaga (Umaga's utterly superb dedication to that character kept him over after the Cena feud) 7) The Miz It's close, but HHH for me. So much revisionism here it hurts. And yeah, there's a clear difference between "I think Cena should have put ______ over" and their career getting completely derailed from being involved with Cena. Guys like Ziggler and Sandow were jobbing before they "feuded" with Cena and went back to jobbing after. That's not a derailment.Guys like Ryback who literally was losing every major feud before he fault Cena to then lose to Cena too isn't derailed because of Cena. A guy like Edge who became a massively over heel by feuding with Cena is the polar opposite of getting derailed. The only person who arguably came out worst from being in an angle with Cena is Zach Ryder. Which ones were revisionism history? I seem to recall Dolph Ziggler winning money in the bank, being allinged with the most over female on the roster and looking like a star briefly... before Cena literally covered him in shit. Edge got massively over by cashing-in, yes. But then Cena got his win back without breaking a sweat really and it was Mick Foley who had to be speared through a flaiming table to get Edge back on track. Wade Barrett got over massively with the Cena angle, again I agree. The segment where Cena leaves the arena and Barrett waves his hand saying "you can't see me" behind his back got major heat. But then? Cena returned and squashed the entire stable and literally buried Wade. (Under a pile of chairs.) Ryback should have beaten Punk, I agree. But he couldn't win the belt because Cena needed to get his win back from The Rock AND win the WWE title at the same time. He shouldn't have lost to Henry either (what the hell was that?!), but when he turned heel on Cena- that segment was hot and Ryback was a major heel/face from it. After the Cena feud? Worthless. Reduced to being a lackey for the guy who cost him the title so many times (Heyman). Miz after turning on Morrison started a program where he got "victories" over Cena. At the PPV Cena squashed him and then acted out kicking dirt on him. Where's the rub of feuding with a top star if he then proves to the WWE auidence that you are out of his league and basically just wasted his time on PPV? Bray Wyatt is obvious after Monday, but really Wyatt hasn't been the same since Wrestlemania and the Cena feud in general anyway. Umaga maybe I'm reaching, but he never really tasted the main events after that feud. Damien Sandow had a great character and the MITB briefcase... "Fueding" with Cena ruined his career. Zach Ryder you already mentioned. I wouldn't blame Cena for that one, but the whole angle was terrible in general.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Aug 28, 2014 17:13:18 GMT -5
It's Cena. Not only has he been toxic to his enemies, he's ruined his "friends" too (Ryder, Kofi, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Aug 28, 2014 17:17:24 GMT -5
So much revisionism here it hurts. And yeah, there's a clear difference between "I think Cena should have put ______ over" and their career getting completely derailed from being involved with Cena. Guys like Ziggler and Sandow were jobbing before they "feuded" with Cena and went back to jobbing after. That's not a derailment.Guys like Ryback who literally was losing every major feud before he fault Cena to then lose to Cena too isn't derailed because of Cena. A guy like Edge who became a massively over heel by feuding with Cena is the polar opposite of getting derailed. The only person who arguably came out worst from being in an angle with Cena is Zach Ryder. Which ones were revisionism history? I seem to recall Dolph Ziggler winning money in the bank, being allinged with the most over female on the roster and looking like a star briefly... before Cena literally covered him in shit. Edge got massively over by cashing-in, yes. But then Cena got his win back without breaking a sweat really and it was Mick Foley who had to be speared through a flaiming table to get Edge back on track. Wade Barrett got over massively with the Cena angle, again I agree. The segment where Cena leaves the arena and Barrett waves his hand saying "you can't see me" behind his back got major heat. But then? Cena returned and squashed the entire stable and literally buried Wade. (Under a pile of chairs.) Ryback should have beaten Punk, I agree. But he couldn't win the belt because Cena needed to get his win back from The Rock AND win the WWE title at the same time. He shouldn't have lost to Henry either (what the hell was that?!), but when he turned heel on Cena- that segment was hot and Ryback was a major heel/face from it. After the Cena feud? Worthless. Reduced to being a lackey for the guy who cost him the title so many times (Heyman). Miz after turning on Morrison started a program where he got "victories" over Cena. At the PPV Cena squashed him and then acted out kicking dirt on him. Where's the rub of feuding with a top star if he then proves to the WWE auidence that you are out of his league and basically just wasted his time on PPV? Bray Wyatt is obvious after Monday, but really Wyatt hasn't been the same since Wrestlemania and the Cena feud in general anyway. Umaga maybe I'm reaching, but he never really tasted the main events after that feud. Damien Sandow had a great character and the MITB briefcase... "Fueding" with Cena ruined his career. Zach Ryder you already mentioned. I wouldn't blame Cena for that one, but the whole angle was terrible in general. A lot of this is really reaching, honestly. Dolph main evented with Cena and was one of the top stars until he won the World title, which was nothing to do with Cena Edge and Cena traded victories throughout 2006. Wade is a possibility but since the plan was to begin the Cena/Rock buildup, Wade was never going to be champion Ryback was certainly ruined by Cena but the damage Punk did to him was worse Miz was ruined before he got near Cena with the King feud and relentless talk that he wasn't good enough Bray dominated most of his feud with Cena but I'll grant you that one too Umaga didn't main event before Cena either Sandow's ruination is nothing to do with Cena. That match with Cena was probably the biggest he had ever been. Everything else since then is purely WWE's fault WWE clearly never wanted Zack as a top guy. That's nothing to do with Cena, either
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Aug 28, 2014 17:36:18 GMT -5
So much revisionism here it hurts. And yeah, there's a clear difference between "I think Cena should have put ______ over" and their career getting completely derailed from being involved with Cena. Guys like Ziggler and Sandow were jobbing before they "feuded" with Cena and went back to jobbing after. That's not a derailment.Guys like Ryback who literally was losing every major feud before he fault Cena to then lose to Cena too isn't derailed because of Cena. A guy like Edge who became a massively over heel by feuding with Cena is the polar opposite of getting derailed. The only person who arguably came out worst from being in an angle with Cena is Zach Ryder. Which ones were revisionism history? I seem to recall Dolph Ziggler winning money in the bank, being allinged with the most over female on the roster and looking like a star briefly... before Cena literally covered him in shit. And he became World Heavyweight Champion and only lost it due to injury in a feud that had nothing to do with Cena. It didn't "take" Foley putting Edge over to get him "back on track". WWE always planned for Edge to be a star. Edge was rubbing shoulders with top guys back when Cena was just a generic jobber in colored trunks. 2009 Miz WAS out of Cena's league. The reason Miz got those victories was because Cena was preoccupied with seeing if he could lift The Big Show. When Miz finally got Cena's full attention, he was outclassed. Miz, even as a tag team champion with Morrison, was always mostly a comedy job guy until he put on trunks and started chasing the US Title. And that didn't ruin Miz's career. Miz went on to win the WWE Championship and a become a three Intercontinental Champion. Bray Wyatt is still pushed as a "top" heel, only behind Lesnar and the Authority collective. Sandow only won the briefcase because someone had to have it. He was nowhere near ready to hold the title, even in its "glorified midcard title" status. If Sandow had taken the Big Gold from Cena, then one of two things happen 1.) Cena gets his win back and takes the title back, 2.) Cena conveniently gets sidetracked from Sandow and "has more important things to do" than chase the WHC which buries the belt AND Sandow, and Sandow is left defending the title against Kofi Kingston in the 7th most important storyline on the card. Sandow was screwed either way.
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Aug 28, 2014 18:26:20 GMT -5
Of all the pictures to show why did you show Triple H and Eugene? No Booker T? London and Kendrick? I was about to post the Booker one, but remembered that he did eventually win a world title, while Eugene eventually got released. So Booker recovered, Eugene never did. Eugene got fired for being a doper though.
|
|
|
Post by joediego on Aug 29, 2014 7:56:40 GMT -5
I don't think the problem has anything directly to do with Cena. It's not that no one gets over on them. It's that because nothing else aside from his feuds (or the title feuds when he isn't involved with them) are booked to be important, once the opponent leaves a Cena program, lose or arguably if they even win the feud, they're left doing nothing. If Punk were still around or Bryan were healthy, then said heel could just be moved on to a feud with one of them where they can maintain some semblance of importance. But since Cena is the be all end all and there are no other big time programs to feed a wrestler into post-Cena, everything else just looks like a step down or a demotion. Either they're having random "get them on the card" feuds with guys like Sheamus, Orton, Kane, Ziggler, Big Show or Miz, or they're doing Wheel of Aggression shit steamrolling the midcard because they're elevated now due to working with Cena so Creative has to still pretend they're a big deal even though they've lost interest. Agreed. And that is pretty much their biggest flaw with Cena. Back in Hogan's run, he wasn't on Wrestling Challenge or Superstars every week mocking whoever he was feuding with in a promo to start the show, then destroying someone trying to move up the card in the main event. Those were 1 hour shows where they would push along 4 or 5 different storylines each week. There was energy and focus on creating interesting characters and storylines to go alongside with whatever Hogan was doing. Hogan, and his current storyline, was obviously the biggest deal, but they never really hammered you over the head with it. They didn't need to. After 10 years of the EXACT SAME THING with Cena, it would be nice to see them at least attempt a "less is more" approach with his storylines. Or at least, move the majority of his act to SmackDown or Main Event and try and elevate and create more interesting feuds and characters on Raw. Wishful thinking, I guess. Great post. Why not make Smackdown the Cena show? He can dominate it and be in the Main Event every week...he can still be on Raw but he can wrestle and talk less. I can't believe it would affect merchandise sales at all, and I also can't believe it would cost the WWE subscribers. It also makes Smackdown a bit more of a unique attraction. The Undertaker was selfless enough to do it, surely John 'Company Man' Cena would be? But that's the point, he's more interested in his own spot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2014 17:58:14 GMT -5
Wait, Bray Wyatt's career is dead now? Brrrrrrrretty much.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Sept 1, 2014 18:20:11 GMT -5
Wait, Bray Wyatt's career is dead now? Brrrrrrrretty much. I'm sure it can be salvaged with a decent feud that makes Bray look great, Maybe the Big Show feud that was supposed to start last week. If Bray takes down Show that could help repair him. Just keep him away from the concrete ceiling
|
|