Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Jan 3, 2013 12:40:53 GMT -5
I would just like for someone to explain how its "forcing" if he's legit more over than most faces.
I really need an explanation. Because it seems like "forcing" is code for "He wasn't a heel who get cheered".
|
|
Marvelously Mediocre
Fry's dog Seymour
Beggin' for a little SWAGGAH!
Haha. What a story Mark.
Posts: 21,224
|
Post by Marvelously Mediocre on Jan 3, 2013 12:51:28 GMT -5
I would just like for someone to explain how its "forcing" is he's legit more over than most faces. I really need an explanation. Because it seems like "forcing" is code for "He wasn't a heel who get cheered". When someone gets a push that a person doesn't want them to get they justify their dislike by saying the guy is being 'forced down our throats' by the people backstage. Even if the wrestler in question is actually over with most of the audience.
|
|
|
Post by BiloxiParish on Jan 3, 2013 12:54:53 GMT -5
He didn't naturally get over In a slow build, he got the wins over jobbers, 5 moves of doom, the catchphrase, merchandise and main evented all within 8 months time. I don't look at it as forcing, but many people do. I used the term Loosely in one of my earlier comments. If it is forced, then I'm enjoying the guy like hell.
|
|
Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Jan 3, 2013 12:56:07 GMT -5
What the f*** is "natural" though?
Some guys aren't meant to wait 10 months in the IC chase before getting that push.
Usually its the big guys who look like they can destroy the top guys. The curve is different. With Ryback, its either jobbers or main eventers. You can't parade that guy around with the midcarders like he's Kofi Kingston for months.
He wins alot, and the intrigue was "Well, can he hang with Cena/Punk?".
|
|
Marvelously Mediocre
Fry's dog Seymour
Beggin' for a little SWAGGAH!
Haha. What a story Mark.
Posts: 21,224
|
Post by Marvelously Mediocre on Jan 3, 2013 13:02:14 GMT -5
He didn't naturally get over In a slow build, he got the wins over jobbers, 5 moves of doom, the catchphrase, merchandise and main evented all within 8 months time. I don't look at it as forcing, but many people do. I used the term Loosely in one of my earlier comments. If it is forced, then I'm enjoying the guy like hell. Damien Sandow for example gets merchandise, He has a catchphrase ("You're Welcome") he has a recognisable move set (just like every wrestler) and started his career beating jobbers. Surely that is a 'natural' way to introduce someone. Ryback's push is a lot more effective than floundering in the midcard for 5 years before they care about you enough to give you a half hearted title reign. If you have a guy like Ryback you want to help him get over. WWE is the machine producing all these characters, they're gonna have to get behind some people. If they left everyone to get over on their own it'd be a mess.
|
|
|
Post by Sponsored by Groose Wipes on Jan 3, 2013 13:06:25 GMT -5
I love the intensity of Ryback, I just think they pushed him to the main event way to fast. I thought it was prefect to have him go after the US title VS The Miz.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,066
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jan 3, 2013 13:09:48 GMT -5
I love the intensity of Ryback, I just think they pushed him to the main event way to fast. I thought it was prefect to have him go after the US title VS The Miz. On the other hand, he's fortunate to be bypassing the US/IC Death Vortex that swallowed up the likes of Kofi Kingston, Wade Barrett, and Jack Swagger.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 3, 2013 13:12:50 GMT -5
He didn't naturally get over In a slow build, he got the wins over jobbers, 5 moves of doom, the catchphrase, merchandise and main evented all within 8 months time. I don't look at it as forcing, but many people do. I used the term Loosely in one of my earlier comments. If it is forced, then I'm enjoying the guy like hell. Here's the other thing, though. It is "forced" in another sense... they forced it. They created a character who cannot ever look weak, who can't ever get beat by any less than three people (and who can often WIN against three people). Poor weak WWE heels have no chance. Now, the writers have two choices: they can have this character beat everybody and be champion forever, or they can come up with increasingly unconvincing ways for him to lose. This is what's called "writing yourself into a corner." They forced it. They went too far.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Jan 3, 2013 13:16:49 GMT -5
I don't think there would have been a problem if Ryback first started in the midcards. A few months with a dominant US/IC title reign could have been fun. Then again, I seem to be one of few that don't see a superstar spending time in the midcards as some sort of punishment.
|
|
Cronant
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 17,556
|
Post by Cronant on Jan 3, 2013 13:24:48 GMT -5
It works for some people.
But I think Ryback in the midcard would either mean him treating those guys like jobbers, or him looking 'normal' with 50-50 booking. People already have a problem when he beats guys like Cesaro, I can't imagine them liking him dominating those kinda guys for months.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 13:30:05 GMT -5
He didn't naturally get over In a slow build, he got the wins over jobbers, 5 moves of doom, the catchphrase, merchandise and main evented all within 8 months time. I don't look at it as forcing, but many people do. I used the term Loosely in one of my earlier comments. If it is forced, then I'm enjoying the guy like hell. Here's the other thing, though. It is "forced" in another sense... they forced it. They created a character who cannot ever look weak, who can't ever get beat by any less than three people (and who can often WIN against three people). Poor weak WWE heels have no chance. Now, the writers have two choices: they can have this character beat everybody and be champion forever, or they can come up with increasingly unconvincing ways for him to lose. This is what's called "writing yourself into a corner." They forced it. They went too far. That's not writing themselves into a corner though. That's them using a tried and tested formula in an attempt to create a star. And it generally works. List the top 20 biggest drawing wrestlers of all time. Guarantee most (if not all) of them were babyfaces who won all the time and on the rare occasions they lost it wasn't clean. You can't have a top babyface who wins some, loses some and generally looks to be on roughly the same level as all his rivals. Well you could, but history shows that they won't be as successful as the indestructible monster superface who wins all the time. Ryback probably shouldn't be losing, period, right now. But if he does then WWE is absolutely right to make sure it's not cleanly.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,277
|
Post by The Ichi on Jan 3, 2013 13:31:05 GMT -5
Gotta say, I didn't believe at first, but maybe Ryback really IS becomming the new Cena.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jan 3, 2013 13:48:53 GMT -5
IWC: WWE don't make new stars anymore, and they don't push anyone. It's the same guys in the main event over and over again. IWC: OMG Ryback sucks he's not ready he doesn't belong in the main event he's being pushed down our throats. Way to go, guys! Probably the dumbest argument I've ever heard in regards to critiquing new talent. The implied sentiment behind "we want new talent" isn't "and we'll literally take anyone new. ANYONE. Put a koala in tights and give him the world title and we'll be happy. ANYONE NEW! It doesn't matter who, how or why - just someone new!!!!!" People want new, but they also want someone good and/or who they actually like and NO ONE should have to clarify that because only a moron would assume that when someone says "I want new talent in the main event scene" they also mean "and please let them be someone I find no enjoyment in watching." The above quoted commentary is probably nothing short of trolling, but is a reflection on how purposefully obtuse people can be in a poor attempt to make a point. Thank you. That mindset absolutely drives me nuts, especially when there are new guys who have been 100% ready for a run in the main-event and had live crowds and internet fans behind them, and WWE just holds them back in favor of guys that give Vince a hard-on. RVD in 2002, Booker T in 2003, Christian in 2005, Kofi Kingston in 2009, MVP in 2010. This trend just endlessly continues, and it's tiresome. All of those guys were on fire with the live audience, and most of the time fan reaction to them on the internet was positive as well. That's the kind of "new" people want.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 3, 2013 13:53:15 GMT -5
Here's the other thing, though. It is "forced" in another sense... they forced it. They created a character who cannot ever look weak, who can't ever get beat by any less than three people (and who can often WIN against three people). Poor weak WWE heels have no chance. Now, the writers have two choices: they can have this character beat everybody and be champion forever, or they can come up with increasingly unconvincing ways for him to lose. This is what's called "writing yourself into a corner." They forced it. They went too far. That's not writing themselves into a corner though. That's them using a tried and tested formula in an attempt to create a star. And it generally works. List the top 20 biggest drawing wrestlers of all time. Guarantee most (if not all) of them were babyfaces who won all the time and on the rare occasions they lost it wasn't clean. You can't have a top babyface who wins some, loses some and generally looks to be on roughly the same level as all his rivals. Well you could, but history shows that they won't be as successful as the indestructible monster superface who wins all the time. Ryback probably shouldn't be losing, period, right now. But if he does then WWE is absolutely right to make sure it's not cleanly. There's a difference between losing clean and it seeming like they CAN lose clean. Hogan almost never lost clean, but he was almost always booked as the underdog in his feuds. Cena "overcomes the odds." Austin got beaten pretty badly in his matches before winning with his sudden finisher. The question was always "Oh man, can he do it this time??" Bundy totally COULD have beaten Hogan, and we wanted to see if he could be stopped. Umaga totally could have beaten Cena. The fans perceived it as possible. That's why, if you want to look at tradition, the monsters are the heels. But now, Ryback is a monster heel, except he's a face. There is NO perception that any heel could possibly beat him (maaaaaaybe Big Show, but probably not). His entire gimmick is that he has no vulnerability. And you just can't go very far with that, in terms of then having that character compete with other characters. Personally, I think there's something hugely wrong with your booking if people cheer someone just because they're powerful and they crush people. But even beyond that, there's a REASON those guys have usually been heels.
|
|
|
Post by "Dashing" Dr.VonPhoenix on Jan 3, 2013 14:14:17 GMT -5
What I mean with Orton back in the day was he was the only one of the three that I thought was ready for the WWE...not "main event" but rather wwe television caliber matches. Yet he wasn't pushed on us like Brock was. Brock had size and a wrestling background but he wasn't "WWE" ready. But because he was a monster I felt he was forced on us...instead of him just rising to stardom via his work. If that makes sense. I know this is a Ryback thread, but I just can't get past this point. If you don't mind, would you expound a bit on just how Orton's early matches were more "WWE caliber" than Brock Lesnar's squashes? Is it just that you're not a fan of seeing roid freaks tearing smaller guys apart? Is it a style thing? You're absolutely entitled to your own opinion, I just really want to know what it was about 2002 Orton specifically that made you say, "Now THAT guy needs to be on TV every week"? I didn't see the appeal of the guy until 2009 and even now it's not consistent. What was I not seeing in 2002 Orton?
|
|
ZERO
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,933
|
Post by ZERO on Jan 3, 2013 14:15:28 GMT -5
Maybe some of us just don't like his character. I don't care if the IWC likes him or not. I think Ryback is horrible in the ring and on the mic. I like some people the IWC seems to hate and I hate some that most love. I've just never got the mindset of people that the IWC just get together and all bash on someone. If there is a weekly meeting of the IWC,I have yet to attend one. This, so much. It's not just on the subject of Ryback. It's like a small subset of the IWC gets together, decides they like/dislike something and then make it look like EVERYONE has reached a consensus that something sucks /doesn't suck. I like CM Punk. I liked him upon his debut in WWE and went back to check out his ROH stuff. I liked his initial babyface "My Addiction is competition" persona, when he resurrected the "Striaghtedge means I'm Better than you" schtick, even New Nexus through to "Voice of the Voiceless" and what he is now. No one else can deter me from that, let alone a bunch of people declaring it on forums like this. Yes, the initial turn was a bit forced, but I happen to think Punk had a point anyway. It's why I've started to resent the internet in recent years. I'll be into something, then go online to discuss it somewhere, only to see a small clutch of Killjoys telling everyone why they shouldn't like it I'm not going to start my own thread to put my thoughts on Ryback out there, but here goes: I do not care for Ryback. You may like him, you may think he blows, I just don't have a reason to care personally. That said, at least WWE is trying to get some fresh blood in there. It may not be what I personally would like to see, but the casual fans do react to Ryback. Their opinions matter to WWE a hell of a lot more than ours. As much as that may hurt you to admit, It's the truth, it always has been. Those are the ones that pay the wages of the Cenas, Ortons etc. Even when for a few months the two top champions in WWE were "Internet darlings" CM Punk and Daniel Bryan. Even D-Bry ultimately got over by doing things to appeal to those more casual fans. It took WWE's bloody-mindedness backfiring on them spectacularly, and a 3-letter word to properly announce Daniel Bryan to the masses. I would also take Ryback winning the title at a later date than part-timer Dwayne Johnson, at a pinch. At least Ryback will be sticking around every week. Maybe Ryback gets Punk after Wrestlemania, in a straight 1-on-1 match and beats the "Best in the World" by, GET THIS, being better than CM Punk on the day. No Tables, Ladders or Chairs, no Cages, nothing. Just two men in a ring, having a battle, to see who is better. Done well, Ryback finally getting Punk with no gimmicks or shenanigans, taking him on and winning can work. The world will keep spinning, regardless. Wow, this was a bit rambling, I hope it's related enough to the subject matter. My idea is to have Skip Sheffield come out and when he gets pissed in the ring he turns into The Incredible RyBack and completely destroys! So... Festus?
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 3, 2013 14:16:26 GMT -5
I think that if they had kept Ryback and Skip Sheffield's histories together, then he would feel like a veteran who paid his dues rather than a "rookie" who got hotshotted to the top.
Ryback/Sheffield should've at least gotten the half assed acknowledgement that Albert/Tensai had. Say he was a WWE Superstar who got a serious injury, and now that he's healed up, he has "new found aggression". Instead of calling him "undefeated", say that he's "undefeated ever since returning".
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,066
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jan 3, 2013 15:05:58 GMT -5
I think that if they had kept Ryback and Skip Sheffield's histories together, then he would feel like a veteran who paid his dues rather than a "rookie" who got hotshotted to the top. Ryback/Sheffield should've at least gotten the half assed acknowledgement that Albert/Tensai had. Say he was a WWE Superstar who got a serious injury, and now that he's healed up, he has "new found aggression". Instead of calling him "undefeated", say that he's "undefeated ever since returning". Hadn't Cole mentioned that he was in Nexus, on an episode of Smackdown a while back?
|
|
|
Post by YiHammer on Jan 3, 2013 15:08:32 GMT -5
"Forced down our throats" only works when the casual fans aren't cheering. They are. Why have his last 3 PPV appearances been met with silence?
|
|
Marvelously Mediocre
Fry's dog Seymour
Beggin' for a little SWAGGAH!
Haha. What a story Mark.
Posts: 21,224
|
Post by Marvelously Mediocre on Jan 3, 2013 15:09:43 GMT -5
I think that if they had kept Ryback and Skip Sheffield's histories together, then he would feel like a veteran who paid his dues rather than a "rookie" who got hotshotted to the top. Ryback/Sheffield should've at least gotten the half assed acknowledgement that Albert/Tensai had. Say he was a WWE Superstar who got a serious injury, and now that he's healed up, he has "new found aggression". Instead of calling him "undefeated", say that he's "undefeated ever since returning". Hadn't Cole mentioned that he was in Nexus, on an episode of Smackdown a while back? On his debut.
|
|