|
Post by SinisterMinister on Jan 27, 2015 2:13:41 GMT -5
Five years is a long time though in regards to society and wellness policy. WWE is far more media and social aware with domestic violence stuff and injury, etc. The shareholders are much more aware of this as well. Add in the CM Punk details and you can see why WWE is being ultra safe. That's probably the main reason they put him with Kane, who has a long reputation of being very safe in the ring. It's just a different time even from Edge.
|
|
|
Post by ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul on Jan 27, 2015 2:35:58 GMT -5
Ask Hardcore Holly how "Safe" Lesnar is. So we'll ask the guy who deliberately sandbagged Lesnar and paid for it rather than the main eventers he actually had to deal more with the rest of the time in WWE? Sure, makes sense. Listen, I am all for ongoing narratives. But this one never jived. Holly has said he didn't sandbag, and even went further to say that if he DID sandbag, it wouldn't matter, Brock was too damned strong. He chalks it up as an accident, that he slipped, and Brock was sick and they just mistimed things. It happens.
|
|
|
Post by SinisterMinister on Jan 27, 2015 4:33:27 GMT -5
So we'll ask the guy who deliberately sandbagged Lesnar and paid for it rather than the main eventers he actually had to deal more with the rest of the time in WWE? Sure, makes sense. Listen, I am all for ongoing narratives. But this one never jived. Holly has said he didn't sandbag, and even went further to say that if he DID sandbag, it wouldn't matter, Brock was too damned strong. He chalks it up as an accident, that he slipped, and Brock was sick and they just mistimed things. It happens. I thought Brock decided to break Holly's neck because he is a dangerous and unstable beast. And he got rewarded for it by Vince..
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Jan 27, 2015 4:41:51 GMT -5
So if it's fair to spread around the WrestleMania main event spot, why has Cena main evented nearly every Mania for the past 10 years? And is this going to be Reigns only WM main event, someone else will get the spot next year? From 2005 to 2014, Cena main evented 5 of 10. That's not "nearly every" Yeah and 4 out of the 5 he didn't main event we're still a world title match. 2 WM main events for one of the most over stars in years is hardly too much to ask, is it?
|
|
Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,324
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Jan 27, 2015 4:50:50 GMT -5
From 2005 to 2014, Cena main evented 5 of 10. That's not "nearly every" That's still 4 more than he should have according to the OP. Ask Hardcore Holly how "Safe" Lesnar is. So we'll ask the guy who deliberately sandbagged Lesnar and paid for it rather than the main eventers he actually had to deal more with the rest of the time in WWE? Sure, makes sense. Do you not think Brock could deadlift Holly? Come on. I am shocked that people still believe the smarks rumor about Holly sandbagging Brock is why Holly got hurt. Brock was sick and messed up.
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Jan 27, 2015 4:53:01 GMT -5
All he's gotta do is say he never lost the title and wants his rematch clause. A triple threat 2 years in a row would be lame so have The Authority make Bryan vs Reigns at Fastlane for the shot at Lesnar. Bryan wins. Problem solved. Bryan wins at WrestleMania. Then whenever Rollins cashes in on Bryan and wins he's the biggest heel ever. Problem solved. Booking 101 for anyone with half a brain.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jan 27, 2015 5:03:57 GMT -5
That's still 4 more than he should have according to the OP. So we'll ask the guy who deliberately sandbagged Lesnar and paid for it rather than the main eventers he actually had to deal more with the rest of the time in WWE? Sure, makes sense. Do you not think Brock could deadlift Holly? Come on. I am shocked that people still believe the smarks rumor about Holly sandbagging Brock is why Holly got hurt. Brock was sick and messed up. My point was he messed up once to someone who has come off as having a grudge for no real reason against the company he used to work for compared to actual main eventers and people he had to work with constantly saying otherwise. Who am I more likely to believe?
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,865
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Jan 27, 2015 5:35:49 GMT -5
All he's gotta do is say he never lost the title and wants his rematch clause. A triple threat 2 years in a row would be lame so have The Authority make Bryan vs Reigns at Fastlane for the shot at Lesnar. Bryan wins. Problem solved. Bryan wins at WrestleMania. Then whenever Rollins cashes in on Bryan and wins he's the biggest heel ever. Problem solved. Booking 101 for anyone with half a brain. That's why I can't believe Bryan didn't win. He never lost the damn title. Almost every champion in the history of wrestling who had to forfeit the belt for legit reasons came back with this storyline.....not Bryan. He just enters the Rumble, loses in quick fashion and sadly wanders away. It's one thing if it was just midcard guy, but it's the most over guy on your roster, one the fans aren't sick of, chant for every night and boo anyone who isn't him when they get the slightest push......I don't get it. It's like WWE is playing to some fan out there who doesn't go to live events or watch Raw or have the Network or like wrestling. They've probably siphoned off all the UFC fans who wanted to follow Brock, time to cater to the people who are there now. WWE is weird, they get product response right there. It's not a movie, where it's all filmed and if everyone hates it you're stuck with it. It's a living play with no rules, you can come up with whatever bullshit story you want for whatever bullshit reason and the people who pay are right there to tell you where the story needs to go next. It reminds me of what my mom used to say at dinner when I was little, "This is what I'm serving. If you don't want it, don't eat it, but it's a long time until breakfast".
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 27, 2015 5:43:06 GMT -5
All he's gotta do is say he never lost the title and wants his rematch clause. A triple threat 2 years in a row would be lame so have The Authority make Bryan vs Reigns at Fastlane for the shot at Lesnar. Bryan wins. Problem solved. Bryan wins at WrestleMania. Then whenever Rollins cashes in on Bryan and wins he's the biggest heel ever. Problem solved. Booking 101 for anyone with half a brain. Considering the majority of people who want Bryan to be champion is because of them expecting a long title reign out of him, having him cashed in on at WrestleMania would just piss off those people even more. At least with the Reigns stuff Bryan can get his title back months down the road when there's no weird hurdles to worry about like the Rumble and Rollins with his briefcase.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,745
|
Post by Dub H on Jan 27, 2015 5:51:12 GMT -5
All he's gotta do is say he never lost the title and wants his rematch clause. A triple threat 2 years in a row would be lame so have The Authority make Bryan vs Reigns at Fastlane for the shot at Lesnar. Bryan wins. Problem solved. Bryan wins at WrestleMania. Then whenever Rollins cashes in on Bryan and wins he's the biggest heel ever. Problem solved. Booking 101 for anyone with half a brain. Considering the majority of people who want Bryan to be champion is because of them expecting a long title reign out of him, having him cashed in on at WrestleMania would just piss off those people even more. At least with the Reigns stuff Bryan can get his title back months down the road when there's no weird hurdles to worry about like the Rumble and Rollins with his briefcase. If Bryan cleanly beats Lesnar,i think people won't be that mad if he gets cashed.At this point beating Lesnar for the title is bigger than HAVING title
|
|
|
Post by CM Parish on Jan 27, 2015 7:15:24 GMT -5
BROCK HAS LOST ALL HIS GAINS
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jan 27, 2015 8:44:52 GMT -5
While it's silly to say he's "done", I sadly agree that the Rumble indicated that WWE, barring a backlash that makes last year's seem civil, has no intentions of making Bryan "the man" in the company, which is what the people want.
If Orton or somebody like that was still the champion, you could look at Bryan losing in the Rumble as something else, maybe a way to divert his character or set up a new feud. But since it's Lesnar, the Beast who beat the Undertaker, dominated Cena, and survived being smashed in the head repeatedly with a briefcase, it's clear that whoever beats him will become "the man". By keeping Bryan out of that match, the WWE is telling the audience "Daniel Bryan is not the guy we're promoting at the top", and fans who want to see him in that spot are justifiably upset about it.
Said it elsewhere, but simply saying people are upset "because Bryan lost" is short-sighted; just losing isn't that big a deal. But the Rumble sent a clear message, because of the implications behind headlining 'Mania against Lesnar.
|
|
peter
AC Slater
Posts: 248
|
Post by peter on Jan 27, 2015 10:44:13 GMT -5
So not being the absolute top dog, face of the company wrestler for the most prominent wrestling organization on the planet, and only being a highly featured top 5 guy instead means you are done? Well shit I learned something new today. From what I can tell if Bryan isn't winning every match and in the main event of every show he's getting buried. I can only imagine the outroar if WWE would have booked Lesnar to squash Bryan like they did Cena. I also still can't figure out how people are thinking Bryan is being treated badly. He just came back from a major injury and has been advertised and featured prominently by the WWE. Not really sure what WWE has done wrong in regards to Bryan. Ridiculous, isn't it. It's funny how people get pissed at Vince's "millennials" comment but he's bang on.
|
|
|
Post by Widow's Peak on Jan 27, 2015 10:55:34 GMT -5
All he's gotta do is say he never lost the title and wants his rematch clause. A triple threat 2 years in a row would be lame so have The Authority make Bryan vs Reigns at Fastlane for the shot at Lesnar. Bryan wins. Problem solved. Bryan wins at WrestleMania. Then whenever Rollins cashes in on Bryan and wins he's the biggest heel ever. Problem solved. Booking 101 for anyone with half a brain. So what do you do with Reigns at that point? I know that a lot of people hate him, but they've already pulled the trigger on his push. You can't exactly have him go from main eventing Mania to wrestling Sheamus in the curtain jerker.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jan 27, 2015 10:56:15 GMT -5
He's not "done", he's important and treated as such. I've accepted that they'll never let him be the "top guy" and maybe part of it is to protect him if he's still not in great health. I don't know. I love him and I want more for him but I can live with him being in the top 3 guys. It's a great spot to be in. Wrestling is just not worth being so angry over.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,055
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jan 27, 2015 11:42:05 GMT -5
Wrestling is just not worth being so angry over. Truer words never spoken. My favorites always end up being complete jobbers, so if I was the type who could get angry over wrestling, I'd be dead of a coronary by now.
|
|
Brood Lone Wolf Funker
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 61,747
|
Post by Brood Lone Wolf Funker on Jan 27, 2015 11:46:24 GMT -5
Will this picture ruin the Paige gimmick? No but it will ruin the Lord Tensai gimmick
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jan 27, 2015 11:48:41 GMT -5
From what I can tell if Bryan isn't winning every match and in the main event of every show he's getting buried. I can only imagine the outroar if WWE would have booked Lesnar to squash Bryan like they did Cena. I also still can't figure out how people are thinking Bryan is being treated badly. He just came back from a major injury and has been advertised and featured prominently by the WWE. Not really sure what WWE has done wrong in regards to Bryan. Ridiculous, isn't it. It's funny how people get pissed at Vince's "millennials" comment but he's bang on. Guys, do me a favor and actually respond to comments instead of doing silly stuff like this. Nobody is saying "The only reason this sucked is because the guy I liked didn't win"; lots of posters have been giving detailed reasons why they're upset at the outcome, and it has much less to do with the outcome of a single match than it does with a much larger, longer trend of WWE booking.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeii on Jan 27, 2015 11:52:31 GMT -5
He's not "done", he's important and treated as such. I've accepted that they'll never let him be the "top guy" and maybe part of it is to protect him if he's still not in great health. I don't know. I love him and I want more for him but I can live with him being in the top 3 guys. It's a great spot to be in. Wrestling is just not worth being so angry over. Can we just sticky that part please.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Jan 27, 2015 12:05:13 GMT -5
From what I can tell if Bryan isn't winning every match and in the main event of every show he's getting buried. I can only imagine the outroar if WWE would have booked Lesnar to squash Bryan like they did Cena. I also still can't figure out how people are thinking Bryan is being treated badly. He just came back from a major injury and has been advertised and featured prominently by the WWE. Not really sure what WWE has done wrong in regards to Bryan. Ridiculous, isn't it. It's funny how people get pissed at Vince's "millennials" comment but he's bang on. I think, at least in my eyes, it's more about paying customers than "millennials". You have a business with a very vocal customer base. You get to choose, in advance, where you will hold your performances, and should on some level know historically how certain cities will react. You can dismiss these reactions as being "wrong" or "too smakry" or "basement dwelling nerd-y", but someone within your organization should be able to tell you, with data, "These are how shows in this area have gone historically, these are the things that crowds in this area respond to". So you have a crowd, from the word go, telling you, "We came here for this thing", they are not shy about it, and they are not alone. They even give you "backup ideas" as to other people who they have paid to see. Conveniently, two of the people that this crowd, who you once again know you're going to be performing in front of because you chose that city and venue, have had convenient storylines that make them "winning" both logical and, from a live audience standpoint, gratifying. Further, let's not forget that tickets to said event, while obviously expensive, were sold months and months ago, so any thought of "Well, they should have seen, with current storylines" goes out the window. If I know where the Super Bowl is going to be in 2016, and I buy tickets tomorrow, what do I do if a team who I do not like is in the game? DO I just say, "Well, I paid to go experience this, but people I don't enjoy are going to be involved so I'll just chalk it up to a loss and stay home"? Do I try and sell the tickets and miss out on the event that I wanted to see? Or, do I do what most would do, go and boo the holy hell out of the team I don't like? And if that team wins, I boo louder. The difference here is that we're coming up on Mania, a show that, for most of us, is a bucket list item. I want to go at some point in my life, I make no qualms about that to my non-fan friends. I'm not ashamed of being a fan, have been since I was six. Thing is, if I go and someone who I don't care for is front and center for the show, I'm booing them. If I get the ticket and say, "Someone I've always wanted to see have their big moment is positioned to do just that", then I'm happy to spend that money. When I do spend it, if they immediately say, "About those thigns you liked, here's something completely different", then I'm going to be, at least on some level, displeased.
|
|