|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Sept 22, 2014 19:12:04 GMT -5
And the first few minutes of Raw pretty well said exactly what we said it was gonna do. So there ya go.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Sept 22, 2014 19:23:46 GMT -5
And the first few minutes of Raw pretty well said exactly what we said it was gonna do. So there ya go. Ain't it cool? The Undertaker's streak boiled down to a plot device so that Cena could overcome some new odds. He'll have the title after HiaC and Brock can go back to, um, whatever he wants to.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Sept 22, 2014 19:41:45 GMT -5
I'm just surprised people were acting like that wasn't the story they were gonna push given how hard they went for it on commentary last night. Didn't even take em five minutes of Raw: "John had that title won!"
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Sept 22, 2014 21:25:44 GMT -5
I get that they probably want to blow this feud off in a Hell in a Cell match at the next pay-per-view, but that in no way justifies bilking people out of their money for a total schmozz finish. They keep doing this over and over with the bait-and-switches at B-level pay-per-views to build to the A-level pay-per-view. Remember when Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose were supposed to have a match at Battleground? Then the Battleground match never happened and was essentially a build to their actual match at SummerSlam? Tonight was no different. Continuing to do this is going to drive people away from ordering these B-level shows. People are going to order WrestleMania because it's WrestleMania, SummerSlam because it's SummerSlam, and the Royal Rumble because it's the Royal Rumble. But if you clearly and continually display a pattern of showing that these B-level events are essentially just episodes of Sunday Night Raw building to the next PPV, then people are going to stop ordering. You can count on one hand the number of DQ finishes in PPV main events WWE has had in the last decade. This is not something they "keep doing". If anything it's a plus because it opens the possibility that DQs are not impossible in PPV main events Used properly and sparingly DQs and count outs can be effective.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Sept 22, 2014 21:28:08 GMT -5
I'm just surprised people were acting like that wasn't the story they were gonna push given how hard they went for it on commentary last night. Didn't even take em five minutes of Raw: "John had that title won!" They can still have Lesnar and Heyman argue he was gonna kick out. The story could and should still be "Did Cena have him beat or didn't he"
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Sept 22, 2014 23:10:41 GMT -5
I'm just surprised people were acting like that wasn't the story they were gonna push given how hard they went for it on commentary last night. Didn't even take em five minutes of Raw: "John had that title won!" They can still have Lesnar and Heyman argue he was gonna kick out. The story could and should still be "Did Cena have him beat or didn't he" Are they even doing anything else with Cena and Lesnar now? If all of this bullshit last night, and the narrative of Cena 'having it won' as opposed to also suggesting that Lesnar not only took everything he AND Seth Rollins had, and still had enough to lay out John, was to just keep Cena strong 'cause Lesnar ain't working until Survivor Series, it's a complete waste and cop out. That finish only makes sense if Brock and Cena wrestle again one last time. And this time Lesnar finishes it. Because if not, all those complaining last night will be proven correct, and there'll be crow to go around for everyone else who argued otherwise.
|
|
Bang Bang Bart
Ozymandius
The King of North America
Posts: 60,579
Member is Online
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Sept 22, 2014 23:12:23 GMT -5
To be fair, Heyman wasn't around to make his case tonight. (For that matter, neither was Lesnar in his usual pretaped capacity)
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Sept 22, 2014 23:13:40 GMT -5
I'm just surprised people were acting like that wasn't the story they were gonna push given how hard they went for it on commentary last night. Didn't even take em five minutes of Raw: "John had that title won!" They can still have Lesnar and Heyman argue he was gonna kick out. The story could and should still be "Did Cena have him beat or didn't he" I disagree, but we've stated our cases; so I'll bow out with the whole different opinions deal.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Sept 22, 2014 23:16:30 GMT -5
They can still have Lesnar and Heyman argue he was gonna kick out. The story could and should still be "Did Cena have him beat or didn't he" Are they even doing anything else with Cena and Lesnar now? If all of this bullshit last night, and the narrative of Cena 'having it won' as opposed to also suggesting that Lesnar not only took everything he AND Seth Rollins had, and still had enough to lay out John, was to just keep Cena strong 'cause Lesnar ain't working until Survivor Series, it's a complete waste and cop out. That finish only makes sense if Brock and Cena wrestle again one last time. And this time Lesnar finishes it. Because if not, all those complaining last night will be proven correct, and there'll be crow to go around for everyone else who argued otherwise. It's another five weeks until the pay per view. They likely wont move on to announcing the cell match until next week. They didn't announce the NOC match on the Raw after Summerslam either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2014 23:20:01 GMT -5
I get that they probably want to blow this feud off in a Hell in a Cell match at the next pay-per-view, but that in no way justifies bilking people out of their money for a total schmozz finish. They keep doing this over and over with the bait-and-switches at B-level pay-per-views to build to the A-level pay-per-view. Remember when Seth Rollins and Dean Ambrose were supposed to have a match at Battleground? Then the Battleground match never happened and was essentially a build to their actual match at SummerSlam? Tonight was no different. Continuing to do this is going to drive people away from ordering these B-level shows. People are going to order WrestleMania because it's WrestleMania, SummerSlam because it's SummerSlam, and the Royal Rumble because it's the Royal Rumble. But if you clearly and continually display a pattern of showing that these B-level events are essentially just episodes of Sunday Night Raw building to the next PPV, then people are going to stop ordering. You can count on one hand the number of DQ finishes in PPV main events WWE has had in the last decade. This is not something they "keep doing". If anything it's a plus because it opens the possibility that DQs are not impossible in PPV main events Used properly and sparingly DQs and count outs can be effective. They're not, though. That's twice in a year that a PPV ended in a DQ, and it still happens on free TV constantly - hell, it happened on Raw tonight twice. It's a copout for lazy booking that just screws over people who bought the show, particularly given it and the Jericho match were the only ones that weren't in some way rehashed for free the night after.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Sept 22, 2014 23:32:33 GMT -5
You can count on one hand the number of DQ finishes in PPV main events WWE has had in the last decade. This is not something they "keep doing". If anything it's a plus because it opens the possibility that DQs are not impossible in PPV main events Used properly and sparingly DQs and count outs can be effective. They're not, though. That's twice in a year that a PPV ended in a DQ, and it still happens on free TV constantly - hell, it happened on Raw tonight twice. It's a copout for lazy booking that just screws over people who bought the show, particularly given it and the Jericho match were the only ones that weren't in some way rehashed for free the night after. The fact that it happens so frequently on free TV and incredibly rarely on PPV is a problem. I'd prefer more balance for the sake of realism. Less on free TV. More on PPV. Same with match length for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by joediego on Sept 23, 2014 1:32:21 GMT -5
Easy solution to that. Don't do the match again! Lesnar's had roughly ten matches since coming back, why do four of them have to be with Cena? Well then let's see you come up with another opponent for Lesnar for Hell In A Cell that isn't Cena, and I guess isn't Big Show either since everyone here was up in arms about that one too. Exactly, he doesn't exist. He doesn't exist because John Cena's been sucking all the air out of the roster for so long there's no legit faces to go against him...hence the reliance on the old timers.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Sept 23, 2014 4:54:11 GMT -5
Some people would defend Cena even if he'd no-sold the F5 ala Ultimate Warrior at WM12. They'd claim that because he's a super hero, it's ok for him to push the boundaries of what's real and what's not, that it makes sense in real life as well some people can bounce right back from pain and shock due to adrenalin. They say the WWE has done it before with Hogan at WM5. That it makes sense for Cena to never be defeated.
How about just letting Cena be beaten by Brock and moving on? Even Hogan had to do that against Warrior, unless you really want to count HH98. Great he had his chance and he couldn't do it. Let someone else try.
OR at least let Cena have to do something else to win. Like even Shawn Michaels against Sid at RR97, he used a camera as well as SCM to beat Sid. Hogan was willing to piledrive Andre onto the concrete floor to win. Hey Hogan the invincible even needed Yokozuna to go through a match with Bret Hart and then have salt thrown in his eyes to beat him at WM9! What's wrong with having Cena do something like that?
Having said all that, I don't think Brock Lesnar was hurt, and I don't see a problem with the finish on it's own, I just see a problem with the whole story, like others have said, suddenly Cena is magic and able to get in tons of offence, and all poor Brock can do is just turtle and tank everything. This doesn't make him all that strong, more like stubborn.
People saying "but if Cena can't beat him, then no1 can!!!1! why should Brock squash everyone!??" CENA can't beat him. CENA. There is nothing unbelievable about having Cena not be able to beat him, and having someone else able to. That happens with superheroes, even Superman. Superman doesn't suddenly look weak, he's just like 'oh i didn't beat that guy and someone else did? whatever, at least justice prevailed'. That even happens in REAL LIFE. Hogan didn't beat the undefeated, unstoppable Warrior, Slaughter did, and then Hogan beat Slaughter. He still came out looking strong. I think some people here really see logic as Cena > Everyone, so if Someone > Cena, than Someone > Everyone. Cena could have taken time off, and then rechallenged Brock at a later time, as the last obstacle he needs to overcome. That'd make for better storytelling.
As for Brock squashing everyone....well YEAH. He should be dominant. The difference between squashing pointless jobbers and other wrestlers is that FOR THE MOMENT, Brock is built up as the unstoppable monster, so anyone going up against him needs a different game plan. Weaken his legs, challenge him to a submission only match, get a special guest referee, handcuff Brock to the post.....there are MANY MANY ways for people to get the drop on Brock, and still have Brock remain the monster and win at the end. Wrestling logic usually allows for this type of thing, and then AFTER the big event such as Wrestlemania where the monster is defeated, he becomes a lot more vulnerable and open to defeats. ala Kane.
It might have skipped over some peoples heads, but there was a lot of positive feedback from seeing Brock finally back on top dominating Cena at Summerslam. To claim that that one match is all the monster should be allowed to do is pathetic. We've been waiting for a strong dominant monster. It didn't happen with Ryback, even Brock himself was hampered by losses to Cena and Triple H in his first few matches. Dominant doesn't have to be stale boring 5 second squash match at the main event of a PPV. But in order to retain that aura of dominance, it has to be consistent. That's just how stories are told. That's how our mentality works.
The scary thing is that some people don't mind Cena being dominant at all. At this rate, it seems like WWE want us to believe that Cena is the best wrestler ever. That he's the strongest wrestler ever. That he is perfection, and if he EVER slips, so what, he ALWAYS recovers. It's unrealistic. I can understand them saying Cena is the best right now, but it's starting to look like compared to every other wrestler in history, Cena is heads and shoulders above them all. Like we could put him up against 80's Hogan and he'd still win. We could put him in the casket match against Yoko at RR94 where all the heels even Diesel interfere and he'd STILL win. We could put him in the Triple Threat match with Kane and Undertaker from Breakdown 1998, where Kane cannot pin Undertaker and Undertaker cannot pin Kane and they both gang up on him and he'd STILL win. There is just no challenge for this guy any more. The only thing left for him to do is beat Brock by the STF at HitC and have Brock crying at the end of the match while Cena stands over him tall, before handing out a handshake to Brock, 'cause he's cool like dat. Realistically I can't see anyone DEFEATING Cena. Cena will always defeat them in the end. The closest we got perhaps was CM Punk where he beat him twice in a row at Mitb and SS, and then beat him the year after as well. I will concede that.
And lol at the people who say why are we getting so worried, it's just a TV show, and if you ever write something about the WWE that is outlandish in a fit of emotion you should just not watch it at all. If you become frustrated with something and then want to just mindlessly vent or air your thoughts after feeling let down, then feeling this way is totally wrong (I can quote the people who said this, although of course they'll now try to spin it a different way) and you should stop. Because obviously these feelings are totally irrational, and they're unhealthy and they're going to lead to psychotic acts or murder or worse. So please please!! Only sensible calm posting here on the internet! We know there is a difference between literally just hanging around the forums to spew hate, and becoming so worked up and really getting into the match leading to emotional outbursts that of course are contextual and not an accurate state of character for the viewer, but let's ignore that here!
Man there is just too much material in this thread to fully cover. This would require at least three long TL:DRs.
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,456
|
Post by r. on Sept 23, 2014 6:58:38 GMT -5
I suspect we'll be seeing a lot more of supercena and odds beating cena now that their hand picked replacement Reigns is out.
|
|
ededdneddy
Hank Scorpio
ededdandembed
Posts: 5,697
|
Post by ededdneddy on Sept 23, 2014 10:37:53 GMT -5
Lets not forget that also Cena is apparently getting shoehorned into a storyline that people actually like just so he can get back at Seth Rollins and for what reason? Because Seth in hindsight helped Cena win or is it just because he screwed over Cenas chance at winning because Seth wanted to cash in? Oh boohoo Cena doesn't win the title so I am going to make sure Seth never gets to cash in. How dare someone else hold onto the title before me. Cause that really seems what Cena was bitching about when talking to Ambrose at the beginning of the show. So now we have to sacrifice a good storyline so Cena can get revenge on Seth and worm his way into the final Lesnar vs Cena match? F**K YOU WWE Creative Team.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Sept 23, 2014 10:55:43 GMT -5
Lets not forget that also Cena is apparently getting shoehorned into a storyline that people actually like just so he can get back at Seth Rollins and for what reason? Because Seth in hindsight helped Cena win or is it just because he screwed over Cenas chance at winning because Seth wanted to cash in? Oh boohoo Cena doesn't win the title so I am going to make sure Seth never gets to cash in. How dare someone else hold onto the title before me. Cause that really seems what Cena was bitching about when talking to Ambrose at the beginning of the show. So now we have to sacrifice a good storyline so Cena can get revenge on Seth and worm his way into the final Lesnar vs Cena match? F**K YOU WWE Creative Team. Yeah. Why would he be pissed someone cost him the championship. That just makes no sense There are so many things to complain about with Cena we don't need make up stuff.
|
|