The Doctor
Dennis Stamp
New teeth. That's weird.
Posts: 4,952
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 29, 2013 11:02:45 GMT -5
oh my god PEOPLE DISAGREE ON WHAT "BURIED" MEANS. Some people just use it to mean "made to look bad on television" and that's a perfectly valid use of the term. Anyway. Cody's booking has just been confusing. He's a tag-teamer... but they gave him all that heat eliminating Goldust in the Rumble, teasing that Wrestlemania match (though maybe the WWE stupidly didn't predict Goldust would be so over). But then they turn around and have him lose so quickly on Raw. Are we supposed to care about him, or not? You're meant to think he's a talented young superstar who is nonetheless not as good as 12 time World Champion, 2 time Royal Rumble winner, multi time Wrestlemania main-event-er and face of the company John Cena. It's simple really.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Jan 29, 2013 11:15:22 GMT -5
honest truth I thought it was pretty funny when Cody tried to take off.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 24,163
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 29, 2013 11:49:51 GMT -5
Anyway. Cody's booking has just been confusing. He's a tag-teamer... but they gave him all that heat eliminating Goldust in the Rumble, teasing that Wrestlemania match (though maybe the WWE stupidly didn't predict Goldust would be so over). But then they turn around and have him lose so quickly on Raw. Are we supposed to care about him, or not? Exactly, he had a good showing at the rumble but instead of following up on that he just jobbed to Cena. It's not so much he lost to Cena but the timing, surely there was another heel that could have took his place?
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 11:54:20 GMT -5
oh my god PEOPLE DISAGREE ON WHAT "BURIED" MEANS. Some people just use it to mean "made to look bad on television" and that's a perfectly valid use of the term. Anyway. Cody's booking has just been confusing. He's a tag-teamer... but they gave him all that heat eliminating Goldust in the Rumble, teasing that Wrestlemania match (though maybe the WWE stupidly didn't predict Goldust would be so over). But then they turn around and have him lose so quickly on Raw. Are we supposed to care about him, or not? You're meant to think he's a talented young superstar who is nonetheless not as good as 12 time World Champion, 2 time Royal Rumble winner, multi time Wrestlemania main-event-er and face of the company John Cena. It's simple really. Yes, I understand Cena winning their match, but they didn't have to make the match in the first place. Why did they book Cody with something ostensibly meant to get a reaction and then treat him the next night like someone we shouldn't react to? I mean, I know the answer: Different people booked both nights, and the WWE is an incompetently managed organization. But it's still frustrating.
|
|
The Doctor
Dennis Stamp
New teeth. That's weird.
Posts: 4,952
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 29, 2013 11:58:17 GMT -5
You're meant to think he's a talented young superstar who is nonetheless not as good as 12 time World Champion, 2 time Royal Rumble winner, multi time Wrestlemania main-event-er and face of the company John Cena. It's simple really. Yes, I understand Cena winning their match, but they didn't have to make the match in the first place. Why did they book Cody with something ostensibly meant to get a reaction and then treat him the next night like someone we shouldn't react to? I mean, I know the answer: Different people booked both nights, and the WWE is an incompetently managed organization. But it's still frustrating. Who said you shouldn't react to him? I'm not seeing the correlation here. They booked him against Cena because they wanted to illustrate that Cena is getting on a roll now. So they used someone we all know is a talented guy to help underline that point. Not being as good as Cena doesn't make you look bad.
|
|
|
Post by Been burned too many times on Jan 29, 2013 12:02:38 GMT -5
Cody yelling "THIS IS A WASTE OF CODY RHODES!" was so true.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 12:03:39 GMT -5
Who said you shouldn't react to him? I'm not seeing the correlation here. They booked him against Cena because they wanted to illustrate that Cena is getting on a roll now. So they used someone we all know is a talented guy to help underline that point. Not being as good as Cena doesn't make you look bad. Because if someone has their own stuff going on, they shouldn't be doing anything that doesn't relate to it, especially lose really quickly? Also, if we were meant to react to Cody, they wouldn't have put him with Cena, because the story was all about Cena. Why would you confuse your audience by having this Cena thing going on and then Cody's thing right there that has nothing to do with the story being told? Finally, I think you're dramatically underselling the extent to which losers look like losers, no matter who beats them.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 29, 2013 12:12:16 GMT -5
Anyway. Cody's booking has just been confusing. He's a tag-teamer... but they gave him all that heat eliminating Goldust in the Rumble, teasing that Wrestlemania match (though maybe the WWE stupidly didn't predict Goldust would be so over). But then they turn around and have him lose so quickly on Raw. Are we supposed to care about him, or not? Exactly, he had a good showing at the rumble but instead of following up on that he just jobbed to Cena. It's not so much he lost to Cena but the timing, surely there was another heel that could have took his place? So it would have been better for Cody to not be on TV at all after the rumble, instead of being in a match with the Rumble winner/face of the company?
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 12:14:17 GMT -5
Exactly, he had a good showing at the rumble but instead of following up on that he just jobbed to Cena. It's not so much he lost to Cena but the timing, surely there was another heel that could have took his place? So it would have been better for Cody to not be on TV at all after the rumble, instead of being in a match with the Rumble winner/face of the company? Yes, if they have some plan for him. Save it for Smackdown or next week. And if they didn't have a plan for him, and he's just a tag-teamer, they shouldn't have given him all those moments in the Rumble, and instead have given them to someone they DO plan to push in a storyline.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 29, 2013 12:16:19 GMT -5
I'm sorry, I just find that to be absolutely terrible reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 12:19:39 GMT -5
Well, ideally they'd have Goldust show up and, y'know, continue the story they started the night before that the crowd was really excited about, but since the only choices you gave me were "not appear" and "lose instantly," I chose the one that seemed to be less stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 29, 2013 12:28:43 GMT -5
Why do you think Cody was destined to begin a program with Goldust? Wait, scratch that, why would that be a good thing? Goldust is past his prime and at best used as a sideshow now (you know, like a surprise Rumble entrant). Cody being saddled in a story with Goldust would leave him worse off than losing quickly against Cena ever would. At least then Cody is associated with the top act in the company, not a tired comedy legend that loses all luster after appearing for more than a week and whose only real purpose now is for people to laugh at how he and Cody are related (which they happened to already do much better than they would do by repeating the joke).
And it's much better for him to appear on the A-show the day after the Rumble than not, regardless.
And the idea that only those they intend to have feud should do anything notable in the Rumble is just as absurd to me. It's the Rumble, it's meant entirely so people who don't normally get to do things can do a cool thing here and there. Not everything has to lead to a drawn out storyline, sometimes letting them do cool things in a major match is enough.
|
|
The Doctor
Dennis Stamp
New teeth. That's weird.
Posts: 4,952
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 29, 2013 12:30:09 GMT -5
Who said you shouldn't react to him? I'm not seeing the correlation here. They booked him against Cena because they wanted to illustrate that Cena is getting on a roll now. So they used someone we all know is a talented guy to help underline that point. Not being as good as Cena doesn't make you look bad. Because if someone has their own stuff going on, they shouldn't be doing anything that doesn't relate to it, especially lose really quickly? Also, if we were meant to react to Cody, they wouldn't have put him with Cena, because the story was all about Cena. Why would you confuse your audience by having this Cena thing going on and then Cody's thing right there that has nothing to do with the story being told? Finally, I think you're dramatically underselling the extent to which losers look like losers, no matter who beats them. Cody hasn't got anything big going on right now. He was just a name for John Cena to beat. Someone recognisable and talented to illustrate that Cena is on a roll. I don't think it confused any one. Mid carders losing to Main eventers isn't a new concept. It doesn't do any harm to Cody Rhodes at all. If Cody was in the middle of a big push that would put him to the next level I might agree with you. But he's not. He just finished a feud with Team Hell No and looked pretty good in the Rumble. But other than that he's not doing anything of note. So it's better for him to be on TV mixing it with big stars in front of 3 Million or more people rather than notching up pointless wins in front of 12 people on Superstars.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 12:32:50 GMT -5
Why do you think Cody was destined to begin a program with Goldust? Wait, scratch that, why would that be a good thing? Goldust is past his prime and at best used as a sideshow now (you know, like a surprise Rumble entrant). Cody being saddled in a story with Goldust would leave him worse off than losing quickly against Cena ever would. At least then Cody is associated with the top act in the company, not a tired comedy legend that loses all luster after appearing for more than a week and whose only real purpose now is for people to laugh at how he and Cody are related (which they happened to already do, by the way). Cody appearing on Raw against Cena is much better than that would be. And the idea that only those they intend to have feud should do anything notable in the Rumble is just as absurd to me. It's the Rumble, it's meant entirely so people who don't normally get to do things can do a cool thing here and there. Not everything has to lead to a drawn out storyline, sometimes letting them do cool things in a major match is enough. Wait, you think it's ridiculous that something that happens on a major PPV that lots of people watch would then be important and lead to something and be remembered the next night? That.... that says a lot about the kind of writing the WWE does, if people have just internalized that kind of attitude. And Cody vs. Goldust would be a good thing because people care, because Goldust and Cody are good actors who would make people care even more, and because Goldust is an incredibly sympathetic character that a big portion of the audience adores. Also.... I mean, because it would be SOMETHING, and something is always better than nothing (losing to Cena in a squash match counts as nothing). Are you guys seriously trying to defend not giving midcarders storylines?
|
|
|
Post by Wrestling Curmudgeon on Jan 29, 2013 12:36:42 GMT -5
Why do this to Cody? Aren't spots like that meant for Jack Swagger?
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 29, 2013 13:08:47 GMT -5
Why do you think Cody was destined to begin a program with Goldust? Wait, scratch that, why would that be a good thing? Goldust is past his prime and at best used as a sideshow now (you know, like a surprise Rumble entrant). Cody being saddled in a story with Goldust would leave him worse off than losing quickly against Cena ever would. At least then Cody is associated with the top act in the company, not a tired comedy legend that loses all luster after appearing for more than a week and whose only real purpose now is for people to laugh at how he and Cody are related (which they happened to already do, by the way). Cody appearing on Raw against Cena is much better than that would be. And the idea that only those they intend to have feud should do anything notable in the Rumble is just as absurd to me. It's the Rumble, it's meant entirely so people who don't normally get to do things can do a cool thing here and there. Not everything has to lead to a drawn out storyline, sometimes letting them do cool things in a major match is enough. Wait, you think it's ridiculous that something that happens on a major PPV that lots of people watch would then be important and lead to something and be remembered the next night? That.... that says a lot about the kind of writing the WWE does, if people have just internalized that kind of attitude. I think it says more that people can't treat an event or a match as a singular thing anymore, and have to analyze every look and glance as though it's leading to some big angle. In reality wrestling has always been full of little moments that don't lead to anything other than being cool at the time, and there's never been anything wrong with that until now. The absolute best time for little nods to continuity and people doing cool things has always been the Rumble. Saying that they shouldn't have those moments if they don't intend to turn it into a storyline is ridiculous to me. Those things are what make the Rumble worth watching, and I'd rather have Santino lay out injured and almost win the thing without it turning into a main event feud than have to have it turn into a main event feud. But it seems a lot of people can't sit back and let a match be a match anymore without overanalyzing about what's good for the business or who "needed" a win or so on and so forth, as though everything mattered a whole lot more than it actually does. And Cody vs. Goldust would be a good thing because people care, because Goldust and Cody are good actors who would make people care even more, and because Goldust is an incredibly sympathetic character that a big portion of the audience adores. They adore Goldust as a comedy cameo. All attempts he's had at doing anything else have really fallen flat, which speaks to the fact that Goldust, as much as I like the character, has always been a one-trick pony. He's never been a serious character, and he's never really been sympathetic either. He' been funny, whether it's awkward creepy funny or Tourette's syndrome funny, it's still funny. Also.... I mean, because it would be SOMETHING, and something is always better than nothing (losing to Cena in a squash match counts as nothing). Are you guys seriously trying to defend not giving midcarders storylines? Nothing is what Kofi got on Raw, which was literally nothing. Not an appearance. And who said anything about not giving midcarders storylines? That's a horrible leap in logic. There's a difference between saying that this is a bad idea for one and saying that midcarders should never have them. Cody had a storyline feud with Hell No, and it was good. Putting him against a semi-retired comedy character who hasn't been great in a while is a big step back. In the meantime, not appearing on Raw would be worse than losing a match to Cena, even a squash. And I'm not even saying it's good for Cody that he was there and lost, he's not 3MB or anything, but the idea that it was worse for him than not being on the show at all isn't logical to me.
|
|
|
Post by Sumbody Gon' Get Dey Kneelift on Jan 29, 2013 13:11:03 GMT -5
Why do this to Cody? Aren't spots like that meant for Jack Swagger? Exactly. To clarify, I meant "bury" as in "squash." I fixed it. I feel like there's a paranoia here at play in defense of Cena, which strikes me weird. And I don't think valid, because the question stands: Cody had a strong showing in the rumble, is always booked as a vicious, tenacious and talented competitor, is a multi-time Intercontinental Champion, and one of my favorite traits about him is that, as a heel, he's always shown to be VERY game to take on anyone. Last night he got in zero offense, tried to run away and was handily beaten in about 2 1/2 minutes, possibly less without the running away. You can say Cena's on a roll or whatever, or it's just business. I don't think Cody's career is ruined; I didn't title the thread "They Ruined Cody." But the choice to use an uppermidcard/sometimes main event heel for a blatant squash is weird to me; reminds me of the Punk thing, but at least SES punk fought back. This was like Two-Face showing up in a Superman comic and Superman just flies down and punches him out in one panel and then winks at the reader like "WHY WOULD ANNNNNYOOONE EVER HAVE TROUBLE WITH HIIMMMM?" It's just inarguably weird booking to have Cody Rhodes defeated THAT easily by Cena.
|
|
The Doctor
Dennis Stamp
New teeth. That's weird.
Posts: 4,952
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 29, 2013 13:37:50 GMT -5
I just think it begins and ends with the fact that they wanted something that would make Cena look impressive. If he had squashed Curt Hawkins it would have illustrated nothing. Doing it to someone we know is talented helps reiterate the entire point of Cena's current angle. That's why it had to be someone like Cody.
And they kind of gave an explanation as to why it happened with him trying to bail because it was a 'waste of Cody Rhodes'. Which serves as an indicator that Cody didn't focus for the match.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jan 29, 2013 13:40:27 GMT -5
I think it says more that people can't treat an event or a match as a singular thing anymore, and have to analyze every look and glance as though it's leading to some big angle. In reality wrestling has always been full of little moments that don't lead to anything other than being cool at the time, and there's never been anything wrong with that until now. This is... I'm trying to think of a good way to phrase it. I mean, you're mixing up having an attention span of longer than five seconds with overanalyzing, first of all. This isn't a glance. Cody/Goldust had an extended interaction during the rumble that had several spotlit moments, and Cole wouldn't shut up about them during that time. Second, anyway, yes there HAS always been something wrong with having nothing moments, because it's a waste. Having cool moments doesn't preclude having longer storylines. Why not script cool moments...... and THEN script storylines that come from them? It's not an either/or. Seriously, I can't understand this mindset that it's good to NOT have people involved in something over time, and it's good to avoid any thought that a midcarder might be, lest you be overanalyzing. He didn't do a single comedic thing Sunday night, and I'd say he was in the top five (maybe top 8) of overness. I think his elimination got the second biggest boo after Jericho. Also, I can't believe you remembered his horrible tourettes gimmick but DIDN'T remember all the real sympathy he had during Bookdust, or during ECW. Just because they keep GIVING him comedy gimmicks, that doesn't mean that's all that works. That's circular reasoning. Also.... I mean, because it would be SOMETHING, and something is always better than nothing (losing to Cena in a squash match counts as nothing). Are you guys seriously trying to defend not giving midcarders storylines? And that's bad.... but are you arguing that it's BETTER for him to show up only to immediately lose? Do you think that's going to gain him any fans? The WWE has trained their audience to hate losers, even as they have people win and lose willy-nilly. No, I said that it's better for him to not be there getting squashed IF they have a plan for him. And if they DON'T have a plan for him, they should have devoted his spotlight time in the Rumble to someone they DO have a plan for. It's whiplash for him to go from Tag-teamer to Singles-wrestler-with-family-issues to Jobber in two nights. Cody could have a feud, here. Instead, they're using him to get squashed by Cena, when that spot could have been taken by someone else. OR someone ELSE could have a feud, and Cody could get squashed. You're defending Cody having that time that leads nowhere and then being squashed. It's that thinking that leads to a lack of midcard feuds.
|
|
|
Post by Jimichiro Likes Erick Rowan on Jan 29, 2013 13:44:39 GMT -5
I would've preferred Cena/Cody to have been in that "solid 12 minute match at 10 o'clock" spot but I get it. Cena's got momentum from winning the Rumble and is supposed to carry it through 'mania (and probably longer than that).
In the production meeting, I doubt anybody said "Let's job out Cody to Cena, lol" but it was more a case of "what midcard heel can job to Cena in 3 minutes and not lose any heat?" It probably would've been Sandow, but he was already booked against Sheamus in the tables match so Cody was the next best thing.
|
|