|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 30, 2015 16:57:12 GMT -5
Which is a terribly wasteful use of Bryan.
As a comedy act, perhaps. Protected? He was dominated in his feud with Wyatt.
Another waste. He's not main event material because he's never been allowed to be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 16:58:33 GMT -5
Well I was being kind. I'm sure he can still tie his own shoelaces. Are you sure? Guy hates sneezing because he can't control it. I imagine he yells at them until they tie themselves.
|
|
|
Post by machomuta on Jan 30, 2015 17:01:56 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Austin´s look was more marketable. Bryan looks like a unwashed hobo. Bryan would be doing a lot better in WWE, if he cut his hair and beard.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jan 30, 2015 17:05:00 GMT -5
Another waste. He's not main event material because he's never been allowed to be. In Ziggler's case, I guess they feel he can't be trusted in the top spots because of his interviews and general public bitchiness about the company. I love the guy, I did before it was cool to, but I can see why Vince would be put off. Same went for Punk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 17:05:13 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Austin´s look was more marketable. Bryan looks like a unwashed hobo. Bryan would be doing a lot better in WWE, if he cut his hair and beard. Outside a horrid Submission Wrestling shirt and a Yes shirt, his only merch is due to his appearance and beard. You cut that and you're just Daniel Bryan as he is now, without merch. It would be stupid. I'd also take an unwashed hobo over another generic pretty boy like this company has a hard on for.
|
|
|
Post by mrtuesday on Jan 30, 2015 17:06:13 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Austin´s look was more marketable. Bryan looks like a unwashed hobo. Bryan would be doing a lot better in WWE, if he cut his hair and beard. But then Brie Bella won't have sex with him anymore.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 30, 2015 17:06:12 GMT -5
They are pushing the exact same amount of people now as they were then. It's not a pool of say 5 or 7 guys that are accepted main eventers to which you have to be finally accepted, it's a ladder where one person is always going to have another on top of them unless you are the very top guy. Right now Lesnar is that very top guy, but Bryan is a main eventer. They just don't want him main eventing Wrestlemania this year. And that's the problem. Given his popularity, which pisses all over the reactions to their chosen one, to marginalise Bryan when a perfect storyline with Lesnar was available, makes no sense. But he's already getting those reactions, and he's already had his Wrestlemania moment. Maybe they simply want to launch a new star this year? It's perfectly reasonable. There have been plenty of Wrestlemanias where real top guys didn't main event. It's no disgrace. And I'm not sure everyone wants to see Bryan vs Lesnar as a Wrestlemania main event. I'm not sure I would buy into it, maybe as a Summerslam but not a Mania. And not Bryan facing Lesnar, who has proven over the past few months that he is far superior to John Cena, the franchise of the company. I can just about buy Bryan beating a part time Triple H and then getting a lucky knee on Batista, but Lesnar has been put on a completely different level. It needs someone that's never really shown weakness before so it can be perceived that Lesnar is his level, and that's what Reigns in. Plus, I find the whole added drama of Reigns needing to step it up and perform under more scrutiny than ever to be quite a compelling, if slightly meta aside to this angle. That said, I also find it quite tiresome that anyone WWE tries to push as their guy now has to face a backlash. Time was it would be reserved for Cena, and it made Cena somewhat special because of it, especially as he would never turn. But now we have to listen to how Reigns is controversial too. Reigns was getting great reactions and won Superstar of the Year, it's not like they tried to push Shawn Stasiak as the top guy. But because certain fans know too much, and know that everything is 'booked', we now can't have a swiftly rising star anymore. But what if we don't want compartively smaller guys like Bryan or Ziggler being booked to defeat a monster like Brock? As I mentioned in another thread, I'd love to know what the inflection point is where it becomes a monetarily bad decision to do what they do. As right now, I think that they have to still be satisfying the majority of their paying customers. But an ever growing section of fans seem to think that they represent the entire fan base now, and I don't think they do. There's probably plenty of people happy for Reigns, or at the very least buy him as a cool looking dude when they look at the Mania poster in the newspaper, meaning they won't have to suspend their disbelief to a ridiculous extent by seeing a guy half his size take down a Brock Lesnar that's been booked as unstoppable.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 30, 2015 17:07:03 GMT -5
Another waste. He's not main event material because he's never been allowed to be. In Ziggler's case, I guess they feel he can be trusted in the top spots because of his interviews and general public bitchiness about the company. I love the guy, I did before it was cool to, but if I can see why Vince would be put off. Same went for Punk. Doesn't explain how Randy Orton has been constantly pushed, despite his well known off-screen issues.
|
|
|
Post by TheSchattenjager on Jan 30, 2015 17:08:30 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Why does Bryan need to cure cancer before this company gives him a real, sustained shot? Austin looked like he could kick your ass. Bryan looks like I could take him on.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 30, 2015 17:09:56 GMT -5
There's no reason why several guys can't be pushed to the main event bracket. During the Attitude Era, they had Austin, Rock, Foley, Undertaker, HBK, Bret, and HHH who were all pushed as top stars. Secondly Daniel Bryan is four years younger than Cena. Neither guy is anywhere near the end of their careers, unforseen injuries aside. Daniel Bryan IS one of those younger talents you speak of. Austin, Rock, Shawn and Bret were all pushed as "the" guy at different time periods, but always only 1 at a time, hell when Austin came back and The Rock was the top guy they turned Austin heel to avoid having 2 faces of the company. As I said earlier Bryan basically is Foley, will never be the top guy but still over as hell and had a short title run because of it. Rollins basically is Triple H, the top active full time heel and will work with Reigns in the future alot I imagine. Ambrose will also get one hell of a push too, not sure what his role will be though, I think he's plan B by the looks of it, I mean Ambrose has been protected as hell recently and main evented a ppv, you can tell by his promos and all the skits they've had him doing that they see a bright future in him Ziggler quite frankly whilst talented isn't exactly main event material. He's a solid upper midcarder though, which isn't a bad position to be in. WWE has always been about 1 top babyface and that makes sense with WWE booking, traditionally WWE have gone for a babyface champion who overcomes the odds, so it makes sense to have as many of the over guys be heels as possible so the face champ has people to work with. Since Sammartino, Backlund, Hogan, Bret, Shawn, The Rock, Stone Cold, John Cena....... Yep, makes a lot of sense. Bryan is the Foley, Rollins is the HHH, Cena is Austin, Reigns is The Rock, Wyatt is The Undertaker and Ambrose...maybe he's Kurt Angle. Maybe he's Kane. Ziggler is probably early 2000 Jericho in all of this.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 30, 2015 17:10:38 GMT -5
That's another problem. This idea that one can only have one Wrestlemania moment. It's a mindset that needs to die, quickly.
Launching a new star takes time. With Reigns, they are jumping the gun, and there's no need. Give him a year, and he'll grow into the role and improve.
That's yet another problem. WWE have limited their options by making it seem that only Cena can stop Lesnar.
No, it's not a backlash against "anyone", but rather a backlash against forced booking that goes against the organic support of the fans.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jan 30, 2015 17:11:12 GMT -5
In Ziggler's case, I guess they feel he can be trusted in the top spots because of his interviews and general public bitchiness about the company. I love the guy, I did before it was cool to, but if I can see why Vince would be put off. Same went for Punk. Doesn't explain how Randy Orton has been constantly pushed, despite his well known off-screen issues. Because they wanted him as top guy from the start so it didn't matter what he did. A guy like Ziggler would always have been starting from behind and he didn't help by not endearing himself to management. Not fair but it's the way it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 17:12:13 GMT -5
And that's the problem. Given his popularity, which pisses all over the reactions to their chosen one, to marginalise Bryan when a perfect storyline with Lesnar was available, makes no sense. But he's already getting those reactions, and he's already had his Wrestlemania moment. Maybe they simply want to launch a new star this year? It's perfectly reasonable. There have been plenty of Wrestlemanias where real top guys didn't main event. It's no disgrace. And I'm not sure everyone wants to see Bryan vs Lesnar as a Wrestlemania main event. I'm not sure I would buy into it, maybe as a Summerslam but not a Mania. And not Bryan facing Lesnar, who has proven over the past few months that he is far superior to John Cena, the franchise of the company. I can just about buy Bryan beating a part time Triple H and then getting a lucky knee on Batista, but Lesnar has been put on a completely different level. It needs someone that's never really shown weakness before so it can be perceived that Lesnar is his level, and that's what Reigns in. Plus, I find the whole added drama of Reigns needing to step it up and perform under more scrutiny than ever to be quite a compelling, if slightly meta aside to this angle. That said, I also find it quite tiresome that anyone WWE tries to push as their guy now has to face a backlash. Time was it would be reserved for Cena, and it made Cena somewhat special because of it, especially as he would never turn. But now we have to listen to how Reigns is controversial too. Reigns was getting great reactions and won Superstar of the Year, it's not like they tried to push Shawn Stasiak as the top guy. But because certain fans know too much, and know that everything is 'booked', we now can't have a swiftly rising star anymore. But what if we don't want compartively smaller guys like Bryan or Ziggler being booked to defeat a monster like Brock? As I mentioned in another thread, I'd love to know what the inflection point is where it becomes a monetarily bad decision to do what they do. As right now, I think that they have to still be satisfying the majority of their paying customers. But an ever growing section of fans seem to think that they represent the entire fan base now, and I don't think they do. There's probably plenty of people happy for Reigns, or at the very least buy him as a cool looking dude when they look at the Mania poster in the newspaper, meaning they won't have to suspend their disbelief to a ridiculous extent by seeing a guy half his size take down a Brock Lesnar that's been booked as unstoppable. This comes back to a point made several times in other threads - people want Bryan to have a real run with the title. He never had it in the 2 years this whole thing has been going on. If he had a good run, good defences and it felt, even superficially, that he was seen as the top man in WWE due to having the belt, it would be out of people's systems. No fans destroyed a show when Stone Cold didn't have the belt because he had real runs and felt like the top dog. That's all people want for Bryan. Fans have done for Bryan what they did for all other mega stars but he has been held off from the same treatment due to this company being size queens. I hope HHH and Steph never have a son because if he does not grow to 6ft 6 and have muscles on his balls, he will be disowned from the McMahon family. Likely why Shane f***ed off and did his own thing, because Vince trusts an outsider with big muscles over his own, normal sized son. It isn't Bryan or no one, it is "do what you've done for every other star we've fell for over the years". It isn't an unreasonable request.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 30, 2015 17:12:55 GMT -5
Doesn't explain how Randy Orton has been constantly pushed, despite his well known off-screen issues. Because they wanted him as top guy from the start so it didn't matter what he did. A guy like Ziggler would always have been starting from behind and he didn't help by not endearing himself to management. Not fair but it's the way it is. The way it is is why this company has found it so difficult to find a new star. When they find them, they refuse to push them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2015 17:13:23 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Why does Bryan need to cure cancer before this company gives him a real, sustained shot? Austin looked like he could kick your ass. Bryan looks like I could take him on. Put me next to TJ Dillashaw from the UFC and I would look like I could crush him but I know he'd put me in hospital within 5 seconds. The appearance thing is freaky to me now, it's a virus.
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,456
|
Post by r. on Jan 30, 2015 17:15:44 GMT -5
Likewise I wont give in and subscribe to your network or buy your ppvs.
EVERYONE WINS!
|
|
DZ: WF Legacy
King Koopa
Porcupine Tree
Posts: 12,104
Member is Online
|
Post by DZ: WF Legacy on Jan 30, 2015 17:17:22 GMT -5
WWE just wants guys they can market outside of WWE. Despite Bryan getting the 'yes chant' over on other unrelated platforms, they want guys they can proudly tout as WWE's new top dog. They can't do that with Bryan because they fear mainstream "potential fans" (aka the ones that see the stupid segments they do with celebrities on ESPN/E and wonder why anyone watches wrestling) will reject the idea of someone who looks like Bryan straight away. There's an element of truth to it, at least initially, but I'd be concerned first and foremost with creating an engaging product the fans get behind before trying to "cross over" and be that wet dream cross-entertainment brand they have their hearts set on for some reason. If half your fans are booing your top babyface, it's not controversy, it's you doing something wrong. It's you playing it safe and not taking the risks that changed the industry in the past. It's the complacency of a company run by a man who is approaching 70-years of age.
I will give them this credit, though. The Network was a risk, and it was preemptive measure to a dying business model in PPV. The alternative was taking a hit and holding PPVs bi-monthly as ECW once did, which would've meant longer and more carefully booked storylines. If the fans aren't being heard in a way they feel is deserved, sacrificing Network subscriptions can be the new form of competition. Mass drops in numbers because they don't listen would send a message. Now, you just have to manage to get people to do it and not just hashtag it...and get people who have double-digit IQ numbers to understand what a sacrifice is and how it's not an attack on The Network's quality itself.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 30, 2015 17:18:40 GMT -5
But he's already getting those reactions, and he's already had his Wrestlemania moment. Maybe they simply want to launch a new star this year? It's perfectly reasonable. There have been plenty of Wrestlemanias where real top guys didn't main event. It's no disgrace. And I'm not sure everyone wants to see Bryan vs Lesnar as a Wrestlemania main event. I'm not sure I would buy into it, maybe as a Summerslam but not a Mania. And not Bryan facing Lesnar, who has proven over the past few months that he is far superior to John Cena, the franchise of the company. I can just about buy Bryan beating a part time Triple H and then getting a lucky knee on Batista, but Lesnar has been put on a completely different level. It needs someone that's never really shown weakness before so it can be perceived that Lesnar is his level, and that's what Reigns in. Plus, I find the whole added drama of Reigns needing to step it up and perform under more scrutiny than ever to be quite a compelling, if slightly meta aside to this angle. That said, I also find it quite tiresome that anyone WWE tries to push as their guy now has to face a backlash. Time was it would be reserved for Cena, and it made Cena somewhat special because of it, especially as he would never turn. But now we have to listen to how Reigns is controversial too. Reigns was getting great reactions and won Superstar of the Year, it's not like they tried to push Shawn Stasiak as the top guy. But because certain fans know too much, and know that everything is 'booked', we now can't have a swiftly rising star anymore. But what if we don't want compartively smaller guys like Bryan or Ziggler being booked to defeat a monster like Brock? As I mentioned in another thread, I'd love to know what the inflection point is where it becomes a monetarily bad decision to do what they do. As right now, I think that they have to still be satisfying the majority of their paying customers. But an ever growing section of fans seem to think that they represent the entire fan base now, and I don't think they do. There's probably plenty of people happy for Reigns, or at the very least buy him as a cool looking dude when they look at the Mania poster in the newspaper, meaning they won't have to suspend their disbelief to a ridiculous extent by seeing a guy half his size take down a Brock Lesnar that's been booked as unstoppable. This comes back to a point made several times in other threads - people want Bryan to have a real run with the title. He never had it in the 2 years this whole thing has been going on. If he had a good run, good defences and it felt, even superficially, that he was seen as the top man in WWE due to having the belt, it would be out of people's systems. No fans destroyed a show when Stone Cold didn't have the belt because he had real runs and felt like the top dog. That's all people want for Bryan. Fans have done for Bryan what they did for all other mega stars but he has been held off from the same treatment due to this company being size queens. I hope HHH and Steph never have a son because if he does not grow to 6ft 6 and have muscles on his balls, he will be disowned from the McMahon family. Likely why Shane f***ed off and did his own thing, because Vince trusts an outsider with big muscles over his own, normal sized son. It isn't Bryan or no one, it is "do what you've done for every other star we've fell for over the years". It isn't an unreasonable request. Goodness grief on the muscles stuff!! I think some people want Bryan to have a good run, but I'm not sure everyone, or even a monetarily significant majority do. Plenty do, but I'd be interested in how many don't. Personally I think Bryan coming back to win would be lazy story telling, and it would be too predictable. There's also a lot of talented guys right now that I would want to see have a run with the title. Rollins taking on all comers would be awesome. They also typically don't hot shot the title around as much these days as they did back then, so it may be tough for Bryan to get it for a long run. He's a regular main eventer on TV, he will get prominent PPV exposure. He's a top guy. They put him over strong at Mania and he would have had a good run until Summerslam. He got injured and that was unfortunate, but I don't think that means plans have to be halted just so he can have a run. Business moves on.
|
|
|
Post by KobashiChop on Jan 30, 2015 17:21:01 GMT -5
I don't understand, Steve Austin was no more physically appealing, impressive or marketable than Bryan but they gave in to crowd response fairly quick with him - rightly too. Austin´s look was more marketable. Bryan looks like a unwashed hobo. Bryan would be doing a lot better in WWE, if he cut his hair and beard. If a capacity crowd in the Superdome is losing their voice cheering for you during the first and last match of your company's flagship show, your look isn't the problem. Bryan has been the hottest thing the WWE have had in a long time. The WWE not agreeing with crowd after crowd is not his fault.
|
|
Hanzo
Dennis Stamp
"You want Cena to go to ECW?!"
Posts: 4,666
|
Post by Hanzo on Jan 30, 2015 17:21:02 GMT -5
I'd rather them push Dean Ambrose.
|
|