Rooting For vs. Rooting Against: A Thought on Fans

[wwerules60]

I disagree about the HHH AND Jarrett thing. If they have made it so people will pay to watch them lose then they have totally succeeded in being a heel. I hate to admit this but I did buy PPVs in 2003 pretty much to see HHH lose.

The thing with Cena is, everyone hates him when he is a happy go lucky babyface but they love him when he is a heel who does funny raps. So they need to change his character as a face or turn him heel and not do the crowd pleasing things. I really don't care if Cena wins or not anymore but it would be nice to change things up in the WWE title picture.

I do think it is good that Cena does get a reaction wherever he goes though. Whether it is positive or negative. The crowd last night was hot for that entire main event.

[HMARK Center]

I used Triple H as an example of somebody who, back in 2004, I didn't just want to lose in a kayfabe sense. I genuinely didn't want him to win, out of some fear that he'd hurt the product as champion again.

There's a difference; like we already said, it's one thing for it to be 1989 and all of us wanting to see Honkey Tonk Man get beaten for being a dastardly heel, it's another thing for one to dread, say, Triple H winning due to thinking "Oh God, he's going to dominate the shows again!".

It's a very different line of thinking.

[The OP]

I don't mean to sound condescending, but your last statement sounds like a person who doesn't have enough perspective or flexibility to know so much about the product and still enjoy it.

I'm not sure if that makes sense or not. If not, let me know and I'll try to think of a way to make myself clearer.

[HMARK Center]

taxcollector said:

I don't mean to sound condescending, but your last statement sounds like a person who doesn't have enough perspective or flexibility to know so much about the product and still enjoy it.

I'm not sure if that makes sense or not. If not, let me know and I'll try to think of a way to make myself clearer.

I know what you're saying, and you're half right.

On the one hand, yes, since I knew of Trips' backstage machinations, I usually equated him being champion with him even further dominating the show. However, I didn't have this line of thinking for very long, maybe a few months after I started reading internet wrestling sites back in '04.

But on the other, I found myself genuinely disliking his on-screen character, but not in a good way. It was an "I'm incredibly sick of him" way. It wasn't just knowing "He uses teh politikz!", it was knowing "This guy couldn't be more stale and dull, yet he's STILL dominating this show!".

When I realized how much I couldn't stand that, I stopped watching. It was more the second thought that set me off than the first.

But that's kind of the point I'm making in all of this; since I couldn't stand the character, but had to live with knowing he'd always be the focus of the show, I stopped watching, or at least made an effort to avoid watching his material. I like to think that means I'm avoiding watching matches where I'm more concerned with one guy losing than I am with the other guy winning (not to sound arrogant or anything, it's just something I've been striving to do).

[leemir]

I enjoy boo'n Cena & I love anti-Cena chants.

[The OP]

hitmanmark said:

taxcollector said:

I don't mean to sound condescending, but your last statement sounds like a person who doesn't have enough perspective or flexibility to know so much about the product and still enjoy it.

I'm not sure if that makes sense or not. If not, let me know and I'll try to think of a way to make myself clearer.

I know what you're saying, and you're half right.

On the one hand, yes, since I knew of Trips' backstage machinations, I usually equated him being champion with him even further dominating the show. However, I didn't have this line of thinking for very long, maybe a few months after I started reading internet wrestling sites back in '04.

But on the other, I found myself genuinely disliking his on-screen character, but not in a good way. It was an "I'm incredibly sick of him" way. It wasn't just knowing "He uses teh politikz!", it was knowing "This guy couldn't be more stale and dull, yet he's STILL dominating this show!".

When I realized how much I couldn't stand that, I stopped watching. It was more the second thought that set me off than the first.

But that's kind of the point I'm making in all of this; since I couldn't stand the character, but had to live with knowing he'd always be the focus of the show, I stopped watching, or at least made an effort to avoid watching his material. I like to think that means I'm avoiding watching matches where I'm more concerned with one guy losing than I am with the other guy winning (not to sound arrogant or anything, it's just something I've been striving to do).

I definitely see your point, and this is one of the things that's so tricky about booking wrestling in the post-kayfabe era. One point that we can all probably agree on is that during this time, with Trips being the main heel in the company, neither you nor anyone else was really supposed to like him. It was intended that we would like whoever was challenging him, and want to watch a main event in hopes that his babyface opponent would be the one to unseat him from his position in the ranks.

Trouble is, it's not like the old days. We all know that Trips wasn't on top because he was truly able to win all of his matches. It was decided behind the scenes that he would remain on top and we all know this.

It's for this reason that the whole psychology of wrestling is so much more complicated today than it was in the kayfabe era. Especially in the context of a message board such as this, there is a possibility that heat could go not to the heel wrestler as intended, in this case Triple H, but rather to the company itself.

This type of situation presents something of a booking conundrum, which frankly, makes me sort of glad it's not my job to try to make sense of it and effectively book a program.