|
|
Post by Widow's Peak on Sept 21, 2015 12:35:31 GMT -5
It seems to be a pretty polarizing topic as to whether Cena having the belt was a good or bad thing. Which side of the argument do you take?
|
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Sept 21, 2015 12:37:37 GMT -5
It gets good matches on RAW that can elevate his opponents, as long as creative remembers to actually follow up on the matches with something, which is usually where they stumble with the whole looking good in defeat thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Sept 21, 2015 12:38:50 GMT -5
Gives a good match most Raws but is completely pointless. I cannot even say they elevate his opponents.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 21, 2015 12:38:34 GMT -5
The matches are good, but with the exception of Ryder and Stardust, it feels like they've given away potential PPV matches. If WWE weren't so afraid that a lower carder's presence might tank the ratings, then those should be the guys "looking good in defeat" against Cena weekly.
|
|
|
|
Post by froggyfrog on Sept 21, 2015 12:52:35 GMT -5
Best part of raw
|
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Sept 21, 2015 12:54:41 GMT -5
I am firmly in the camp of "meh."
It resulted in him having a lot of matches that were well received by people. I was never big on most of them but hey, what can you do? At the same time, what a random move it was in hindsight to put the belt on Rollins only to give it right back to Cena. Even if they wanted to the Stewart turn, why not just make the Summerslam match for the world title?
It just seems pointless more than anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by cahuette on Sept 21, 2015 12:56:31 GMT -5
Good matches are worth nothing if they don't mean anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 21, 2015 13:02:52 GMT -5
I am firmly in the camp of "meh." It resulted in him having a lot of matches that were well received by people. I was never big on most of them but hey, what can you do? At the same time, what random move it was in hindsight to put the belt on Rollins only to give it right back to Cena. Even if they wanted to the Stewart turn, why not just make the Summerslam match for the world title? It just seems pointless more than anything. If it was just for the world title, people would complain about how Cena stopped giving a shit about the US Title. And if he lost that match, people would complain about midcard champs jobbing, even if that champ is Cena. |
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Sept 21, 2015 13:12:17 GMT -5
Good fun for a one watch match. But someone needs to beat him for it, on Raw, not a PPV. Preferably when the next show is already set up so Cena has to insert himself into a three way match, lose without eating a pin and then can f*** off to some other angle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 13:13:51 GMT -5
Good matches are worth nothing if they don't mean anything. The US title means more now than it ever has under WWE's umbrella though and that is mostly due to the quality of the US open matches. |
|
Pushed to the Moon
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Tony Schiavone in Disguise
Working myself into a shoot
Posts: 15,819 
|
Post by Pushed to the Moon on Sept 21, 2015 13:14:40 GMT -5
Good matches in isolation. Who's actually gained from it other than "looking strong in defeat"?
I just looked up the challengers.
Barrett? Lolzzzz
Ambrose. Teaming with Reigns. Pretty much the same level as always.
Stardust. Doing nothing I can think of.
Cesaro. Was he even on the PPV last night?
Neville. Don't even remember what he's doing off the top of my head.
Owens: doing well. IC Champ.
Kane: in the WWE title picture i guess? WAY TO GO KANE! That rub from Cena really helped you out!
|
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Sept 21, 2015 13:16:39 GMT -5
Neville and Stardust are feuding.
They were on the preshow last night and were talked about on the PPV proper.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Sept 21, 2015 13:16:33 GMT -5
I am firmly in the camp of "meh." It resulted in him having a lot of matches that were well received by people. I was never big on most of them but hey, what can you do? At the same time, what random move it was in hindsight to put the belt on Rollins only to give it right back to Cena. Even if they wanted to the Stewart turn, why not just make the Summerslam match for the world title? It just seems pointless more than anything. If it was just for the world title, people would complain about how Cena stopped giving a shit about the US Title. And if he lost that match, people would complain about midcard champs jobbing, even if that champ is Cena. Don't give me that shit, haha. You're speaking in pure hypotheticals. The feud literally started with Cena defending the US belt on Raw against Rollins. If people wanted to make the argument that Cena just stopped caring about the US belt, they'd be reaching with that one. Going for the world title for one month would have done 0 damage to the credibility of the US title, no more than this hot-shot stuff they just did anyway. Also, complaining about midcard champs jobbing with Cena? No dude. Just no. US title or not, the people that marked for Cena losing would have marked no matter what the circumstance. |
|
|
|
Post by cahuette on Sept 21, 2015 13:21:43 GMT -5
Good matches are worth nothing if they don't mean anything. The US title means more now than it ever has under WWE's umbrella though and that is mostly due to the quality of the US open matches. And it all goes down the drain in the 3 weeks after Cena loses it for good. |
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Sept 21, 2015 13:26:00 GMT -5
I love the matches, but the entire concept only works if he eventually loses one of the open challenges.
|
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Sept 21, 2015 13:31:07 GMT -5
The problem with "looking good in defeat" and by extension, the US Open Challenge, is that you have to believe that the top guy can lose. Did anybody ever believe that John Cena would lose? And then when John does win, it just shows that the opponent can throw whatever he wants at John Cena, but still won't get the job done. That's not making someone look good.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 21, 2015 13:38:33 GMT -5
The problem with "looking good in defeat" and by extension, the US Open Challenge, is that you have to believe that the top guy can lose. Did anybody ever believe that John Cena would lose? And then when John does win, it just shows that the opponent can throw whatever he wants at John Cena, but still won't get the job done. That's not making someone look good. I think the fact that someone is walking into a match with John Cena and not getting squashed makes someone look good. Hell, Neville had a visual pin on Cena and would've won if not for interference. Likewise, Cesaro had Cena beat if not for interference. And Zack Ryder actually got to surprise people and show them that "Hey, he's actually kinda good", and he pulled out some new moves we haven't seen him do before. And Sami Zayn had a hot main roster debut and the only thing that hurt his momentum was getting injured. I mean, the Open Challenge won't do anything for Dean Ambrose, Kane, or even Barrett. but for guys further down the pecking order, it's a good way to help the fans take notice of their skills and realize that they're actually good wrestlers. Give someone like Heath Slater or Fandango that kind of match with Cena, and it goes a long way for them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 13:45:56 GMT -5
It does nothing to elevate the prestige or importance of the title.
Its not the "US TITLE" anymore, its the "This Title Is Only Important When John Cena Has It" title.
It also shouldn't be an "open challenge" for the title, because while that is fun for a few nights, ideally it should be a heavily sought after title that people clamour over each other to get a shot at.
Cena shouldn't be playing is worn out "man of the people" schtick with it. He should be like an elder king, sitting on his throne only allowing most worthy challengers to have a shot.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Sept 21, 2015 13:52:33 GMT -5
It does nothing to elevate the prestige or importance of the title. Its not the "US TITLE" anymore, its the "This Title Is Only Important When John Cena Has It" title. It also shouldn't be an "open challenge" for the title, because while that is fun for a few nights, ideally it should be a heavily sought after title that people clamour over each other to get a shot at. Cena shouldn't be playing is worn out "man of the people" schtick with it. He should be like an elder king, sitting on his throne only allowing most worthy challengers to have a shot. In that scenario, the "most worthy" challengers would only be other guys who are too good for the U.S. Title. Cena's contenders would be no better than Cena himself, guys who are "settling" for the U.S. Title because they can't have the WWE World Heavyweight Title right now. It would be the "This Title is Only Important Because John Cena is Defending It against Randy Orton, Sheamus, Dean Ambrose, Roman Reigns and the Big Show" Title. Cena as an "elder king" basically makes it almost as if we were back to having two World Titles. The open challenge at least ensures that actual midcarders have a chance at what should be a midcard title. |
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Sept 21, 2015 13:58:45 GMT -5
Can't say I care for it.
Yeah, it gives us some good matches. That's the only positive to it though. And even then, the matches aren't so good that it outweighs the negatives. They aren't all-time classic matches or anything.
Nobody is elevated by it since Cena always wins and they never follow up the losers with anything. The US title will go back to being shit once Cena loses the title. And we get the joy of Cena going over every midcarder on the roster.
|
|
