|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 27, 2007 15:24:09 GMT -5
So, with all the backlash against Cena's win last night, and with the memory of the ROH show I just went to at the Manhattan Center still fresh in my mind, an interesting thought occurred to me concerning how fans go about enjoying a show. I'm not here to tell anyone HOW to cheer, but it's something I hadn't really thought about before today.
During the World Title match at the ROH show between Bryan Danielson and Takeshi Morishima, the crowd around me was mostly pro-Danielson, and would give Morishima some heel heat for using his size to his advantage against the smaller man. However, despite that, the crowd would still acknowledge when Morishima pulled off either an impressive move, or made something look particularly effective. When he won at the end of the match, the reaction wasn't boos against Morishima (who's more tweener than anything, I suppose), but some respectful cheering for him and some chants of "MORISHIMA!". Bottom line: a lot of people wanted Dragon to win because they like Dragon, but still had a ton of respect for the champion.
Juxtapose that with the vibe I'm getting from SummerSlam: Randy Orton vs. John Cena. Call me crazy, but I don't think most of us here (correct me if I'm wrong) are particularly crazy for either guy. Orton's got a bland streak and relies too heavily on restholds, while Cena's, well...Cena. However, I'm reading things like "I marked SO hard for the RKO when he hit it", and it made me question why.
The conclusion I've reached is a simple one, but, again, one I hadn't really thought much about: people were so much more concerned with Cena losing the title than with Orton winning it that they were willing to mark for anything Orton did.
There's the thing: many of the people watching it were tense, excited, etc., but not for something positive (Orton GAINING the title), but for something negative (Cena LOSING it). I don't mean negative/positive in the "bad/good" way, either.
I suddenly remembered feeling that way when I would watch old Triple H or Jeff Jarrett defenses. I wasn't watching in the hopes that so-and-so would win, but in the hopes that the guys with the undeserved (in my mind) strangleholds on the belts would go away. I wasn't enjoying the matches for what they were, I was cheering for something so that, in the non-kayfabe world, the company could move on from something I was tired of.
When I realized that, I had to ask myself: is this really worth it? I'd be taking myself out of the immediate action, focusing more on the real-world implications of a title match (i.e. "how will this affect ratings?", or "They need to set up this storyline instead of that one!", etc.), rather than looking forward to a title match that SHOULD be one of the better matches on a given card.
Now, I'm not saying that the reaction to the ROH match is how every title match should end. Obviously, if Morishima were a straight up heel and Danielson a face and the crowd cheered for Morishima winning, something wouldn't really be right. But that's not what the situation was.
Let me put it this way: People were cheering FOR a Danielson win over Morishima. People were cheering AGAINST Cena retaining the title over Orton.
There's a big difference, and it's a huge difference in mentality. I walked into Danielson/Morishima (and Briscoes vs. Steen/Generico, for that matter) knowing that, whoever won, I was in for an amazing match and a fun night. I can't imagine going into something like Orton vs. Cena that same way, if I were hoping so hard for Cena to drop the strap.
I'm not saying "shut up and cheer Cena!", I'm saying that maybe, if you find yourself doing this a lot, it could be time to start reconsidering your viewing habits. Is it really worth the aggravation? Is it really fun? Obviously, I'm not going to answer that for anyone, and what I'm saying is all opinion, not fact.
Regardless, I just thought it was something interesting to touch upon.
|
|
|
Post by Munkie91087 on Aug 27, 2007 15:32:55 GMT -5
Very well said. I do have a question for you, how was the Morishima-AmDrag match. How would you rate it because I had a lot of hope for it, and I am thinking of ordering the DVD.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 27, 2007 15:35:13 GMT -5
Very well said. I do have a question for you, how was the Morishima-AmDrag match. How would you rate it because I had a lot of hope for it, and I am thinking of ordering the DVD. Absolutely amazing. Dragon was spot-on, and Morishima was in full-on monster mode. Unfortunately, Dragon got an accidental eye injury around the midway point of the match (which swelled up pretty bad), so they cut to the ending probably 5 minutes or so more quickly than they would have (at least that's how it felt). Still, fantastic, and hopefully Dragons' ok...both for his health, and because a rematch would be fantastic.
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,477
|
Post by r. on Aug 27, 2007 15:42:43 GMT -5
ive already taken that approach, i simply change the channel when cena comes on, it save me the headache of either seeing him put forth some juvinile insult, or retain agian.
you bring up an excellent point, its so bad that ppl would mark for snitsky if he won the belt.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 27, 2007 15:48:17 GMT -5
ive already taken that approach, i simply change the channel when cena comes on, it save me the headache of either seeing him put forth some juvinile insult, or retain agian. you bring up an excellent point, its so bad that ppl would mark for snitsky if he won the belt. An unsettling thought...but I wouldn't doubt it.
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,477
|
Post by r. on Aug 27, 2007 15:55:31 GMT -5
An unsettling thought...but I doubt it. fixed
|
|
|
Post by Jason Todd Grisham on Aug 27, 2007 15:56:40 GMT -5
Who are you to doubt El Dandy?
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,477
|
Post by r. on Aug 27, 2007 16:00:03 GMT -5
my secrets out, im actually mean gean.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Scorpio, 2 time BCW Champ on Aug 27, 2007 16:00:55 GMT -5
I'd like to add a car to your train of thought. Back in the day, people waited for Honky Tonk Man to lose the Intercontinental Championship because they hated him (as they were supposed to as marks). That's not to say they necessarily liked the opponents who went against him. Modern day WWE is, intentionally or not, taking wrestling to the next level of fan consciousness. For the particular breed of fan who bashes Cena, the champ is a heel and a damn good one. When Orton challenged for the WWE Championship, he essentially underwent a face turn for those same fans. He is, admittedly, a poor face. He's more a Lex Luger than a Stone Cold. In this face turn, we want him to win, but not too many of us are watching for him. With Cena, WWE is building off of the lesson of HHH. Whereas HHH was a heel because he opposed our favorite faces and cheated and was generally mean, he was a heel to the IWC for a laundry list of backstage reasons (real or imagined). Now John Cena is a face because he wrestles heels, but to many of us he is a heel for his limited moveset and his tendency to no sell injuries during his inevitable comebacks. Just as the Matt/Edge/Lita angle blurred the line between ring and reality, the current John Cena character straddles that line. We are then faced with a question. Can any of us, marks or smarks, truly see John Cena?
|
|
Corporate H
Grimlock
He Buries Them Alive
Posts: 13,829
|
Post by Corporate H on Aug 27, 2007 16:01:08 GMT -5
That's what's so upsetting about the ou come. Either way you lose, Cena's title reign is going nowhere because he's beating every credible competitor and Orton's reign isn't exactly something everyone is clamoring for. The thing is, I'd rather have Orton win the belt because he's a heel and it would be a change of pace. For once Cena would chasing the belt and not hogging it, and I'd feel okay about hating Orton as champ because he's meant to be hated.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 27, 2007 16:06:00 GMT -5
I'd like to add a car to your train of thought. Back in the day, people waited for Honky Tonk Man to lose the Intercontinental Championship because they hated him (as they were supposed to as marks). That's not to say they necessarily liked the opponents who went against him. Modern day WWE is, intentionally or not, taking wrestling to the next level of fan consciousness. For the particular breed of fan who bashes Cena, the champ is a heel and a damn good one. When Orton challenged for the WWE Championship, he essentially underwent a face turn for those same fans. He is, admittedly, a poor face. He's more a Lex Luger than a Stone Cold. In this face turn, we want him to win, but not too many of us are watching for him. With Cena, WWE is building off of the lesson of HHH. Whereas HHH was a heel because he opposed our favorite faces and cheated and was generally mean, he was a heel to the IWC for a laundry list of backstage reasons (real or imagined). Now John Cena is a face because he wrestles heels, but to many of us he is a heel for his limited moveset and his tendency to no sell injuries during his inevitable comebacks. Just as the Matt/Edge/Lita angle blurred the line between ring and reality, the current John Cena character straddles that line. We are then faced with a question. Can any of us, marks or smarks, truly see John Cena? I see your point, but lets not kid ourselves, either, about the 1980's; yes, people hated Honkey (and, you're right, as they were supposed to), but back then, more so than ever, children made up such an enormous part of the WWF's audience that it was ridiculous. And children, and I can say this having been one during that era, will cheer almost ANY face to beat a heel. It's different now: most of the audience is in the 13-30 range, the whole mentality needs to change. I mean, I've seen heels who've been so good that they've gotten indy crowds to COMPLETELY hate them...you know, the supposed "smarks who will always cheer you as long as you have workrate", those same smarks who've made hated men out of Jimmy Rave, Chris Hero, and others. There ARE good heels out there who get heel heat due to actually performing well as bad guys. That's an aspect of wrestling that should never be tampered with.
|
|
|
Post by tap on Aug 27, 2007 17:58:39 GMT -5
I'm reminded of the DVD extra on Jake Roberts' DVD, where he talks about playing heel against Hogan in Montreal in '86 (?), how the crowd was split 50/50, and he said you never do that. Granted, the pro-Cena/anti-Cena split isn't always neat and tidy, but Cena, akin to Hogan, is the golden goose. I fail to see how a "heel to some, face to others" mentality WWE has been employing for the past 2 years or so is good for business, especially sending the fans home upset the past two Wrestlemanias, because the lack of consistency creates a bind as to pushing credible, marketable challengers people want to see more than once, rather than to topple Cena off the mountain. As mentioned in this thread already, some people change the channel or don't buy/watch altogether if they know Cena's going to win, and that is something WWE should not be currying. Just my take though.
|
|
JMA
Hank Scorpio
Down With Capitalism!
Posts: 6,880
|
Post by JMA on Aug 27, 2007 20:27:40 GMT -5
So basically, Cena is some kind of postmodern heel?
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on Aug 27, 2007 20:35:35 GMT -5
So basically, Cena is some kind of postmodern heel? Vince: What's this "Postmodern" stuff? I've never heard of it. Change it to an evil.....mailman. Also, I agree with the original post. I cheer/mark for the things I LIKES. The things I don't like, I just wait to end and something I like to happen. Very zen. Very drunk.
|
|
|
Post by Galluchadore on Aug 27, 2007 20:50:59 GMT -5
If you were to write a book on the history and theory of Pro wrestling John Cena will be one of the longest and most interesting chapters. His entire run as a champion for the past two and a half years or so have been so unique for a top level baby face (and not in a good way). There has never been a babyface that I know of that has been booed so heavily in wrestling that continues to be pushed as the top guy and seems to always win. Last I check the key to being a good face is to be the guy who gets the entire crowd behind and care what happens to him not selling merchandise.. The guy has done such a good job of dividing the audience into A. Kids, girls, and Marks vs B. Older Guys and Smarks. And dividing the audience works sometimes like the NWO but with Cena it feels so different like they aren't choosing sides because they like the characters they are choosing sides because they like or dislike the persona or performer. I really think one the problems with Cena is that if WWE's business as a whole was making the type of money they were years ago (look at buy rates, attendance... ratings its true ) they would listen to the crowd reactions and do what makes sense and that is turn him. (make him a corporate puppet champion to appeal to kids with the sole purpose of making money.. would work perfectly). Since the current WWE product hasn't created a truly solid long term over baby face that can compete with Cena in merchandise sales they can't lose their biggest seller. That being another problem as most of his fans who buy his shirts are younger kids who would take the heel turn badly and not buy a "bad guy shirt"...
|
|
|
Post by SEND FOR THE MAN!!! on Aug 27, 2007 21:13:44 GMT -5
I'm sure everyone notices that during most Cena matches theres a "Let's go Cena" chant, which is immediately followed by the "Cena sucks" chant. This reminds me of the first Hogan/Rock match where NOBODY expected the Rock to be booed. If we have to keep dealing with Cena, why not book him in an angle like Rock/Hogan, where some of the fans turn on Cena and Cena actually acknowleges this. Right now, I could see HHH playing that Hogan role, and even if (or should I say when) Cena wins, it could lead to the return of heel Cena and at least make things fresh.
But then again, that makes too much sense.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Aug 27, 2007 21:47:16 GMT -5
My point is more directed towards the people who watch Cena and basically lose it when he wins. The very concept of buying a pay per view more in the hopes of seeing a guy (who's not a good heel, but rather a poor one or a babyface getting bad reactions) lose, more than hoping to see another guy win just seems so odd to me the more I think about it.
I mean, if I genuinely disliked the major angle that a company I was watching was running, in a non-kayfabe sense, in this case a babyface champion who's been illogically booked and made to be the "golden child" against a lot of the crowds' wishes, I would likely take a step back and not order shows, or spend less time around the product. Otherwise, I'm just spending my time hitting my head against a wall in the false hope that the company will magically change directions overnight or something.
Is that the new kind of character we're supposed to be seeing? Is that how fans are supposed to leave shows, feeling genuine, real life bile at the results of a show? I mean, heels have won major events and fans have still left happy, but here the big face wins and most people are miserable. I guess, in a way, it is some kind of demented, twisted, post modern version of old school heels and faces.
Anyway, at the heart of the problem with Cena is that there's no other major babyface to counteract him. Not a single one.
|
|
|
Post by drjayphd (feat. Pitbull) on Aug 27, 2007 22:45:51 GMT -5
This reminds me of the first Hogan/Rock match where NOBODY expected the Rock to be booed. If we have to keep dealing with Cena, why not book him in an angle like Rock/Hogan, where some of the fans turn on Cena and Cena actually acknowleges this. But if WWE was interested in doing that, wouldn't they have already done so? They've had plenty of chances to use the loathing, and the closest I've seen to Cena acknowledging the boos and working heelish was One Night Stand 2006... and that's because it was in ECW Country.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Aug 27, 2007 22:49:01 GMT -5
My point is more directed towards the people who watch Cena and basically lose it when he wins. The very concept of buying a pay per view more in the hopes of seeing a guy (who's not a good heel, but rather a poor one or a babyface getting bad reactions) lose, more than hoping to see another guy win just seems so odd to me the more I think about it. I mean, if I genuinely disliked the major angle that a company I was watching was running, in a non-kayfabe sense, in this case a babyface champion who's been illogically booked and made to be the "golden child" against a lot of the crowds' wishes, I would likely take a step back and not order shows, or spend less time around the product. Otherwise, I'm just spending my time hitting my head against a wall in the false hope that the company will magically change directions overnight or something. Is that the new kind of character we're supposed to be seeing? Is that how fans are supposed to leave shows, feeling genuine, real life bile at the results of a show? I mean, heels have won major events and fans have still left happy, but here the big face wins and most people are miserable. I guess, in a way, it is some kind of demented, twisted, post modern version of old school heels and faces. Anyway, at the heart of the problem with Cena is that there's no other major babyface to counteract him. Not a single one. It's partially a moot point though, considering that both Cena and Orton have a lot of fans. Hell, a lot of people even like Batista. Why do people that hate WWE spend money on their ppvs? That I don't know. Maybe they just have too much time and money on their hands, or maybe they like to get burned because they enjoy complaining on the internet.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Aug 27, 2007 22:51:18 GMT -5
Why do people that hate WWE spend money on their ppvs? That I don't know. Maybe they just have too much time and money on their hands, or maybe they like to get burned because they enjoy complaining on the internet. I highlighted the correct answer for you. ;D
|
|