|
|
Post by bigalbass86 AKA Smokin Vokoun on Aug 25, 2013 23:57:16 GMT -5
Crap double post.  |
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Aug 26, 2013 0:01:15 GMT -5
Yeah, I've heard his "agruements" on why he hates Bryan. And honestly, he doesn't bring up any real constructive points at all. Other than "He's boring" or "He looks bland". So I don't blame people for being frustrated with him because that kind of thinking doesn't lend itself to a real good debate. My main issue with it is the fact that he said earlier in the thread that no matter what Bryan did to try and change or improve on the things he mentioned he didn't like about him that he'd still hate him regardless. That makes no sense. That's not an opinion. that's just blind hate and it deserves no respect or consideration. It's an educated guess based on history. He feels strongly enough based on Bryan's 4 years of WWE work and everything he's done in that stretch that he simply is not capable of doing something to make him a fan, no different of someone being confident that they will never be an Alberto Del Rio fan. To be baffled by that is really quite silly, it's not that complex a thing to grasp. However, to say that it deserves no consideration or respect compared any other opinion is both condescending and asinine. There's no expertise involved in whether or not a wrestler entertains you, it's all taste, and whether someone chooses to write an essay every post or not doesn't affect how much worth their opinion has. |
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on Aug 26, 2013 0:01:38 GMT -5
There are some things in this world that you simply cannot stand, no matter how good they may be.
For me one of those things is Daniel Bryan.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigalbass86 AKA Smokin Vokoun on Aug 26, 2013 0:03:00 GMT -5
There are some things in this world that you simply cannot stand, no matter how good they may be. For me one of those things is Daniel Bryan. So there is no way he could ever hope impress you? |
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on Aug 26, 2013 0:05:30 GMT -5
There are some things in this world that you simply cannot stand, no matter how good they may be. For me one of those things is Daniel Bryan. So there is no way he could ever hope impress you? I have yet to see it, so probably not. unless he can convince Renee Young to have sex with me. Then I'll be a DB fan for life. |
|
|
|
Post by bigalbass86 AKA Smokin Vokoun on Aug 26, 2013 0:07:00 GMT -5
So there is no way he could ever hope impress you? I have yet to see it, so probably not. unless he can convince Renee Young to have sex with me. Then I'll be a DB fan for life. Well, I guess we agree to disagree. |
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Aug 26, 2013 0:24:37 GMT -5
As if there's anything wrong with that. It's pretty obvious Vince deeply loves wrestling and focuses mostly on his company's wrestling aspects despite him wanting WWE to be seen as more than just that, so I don't see the point in attacking WWE for their business tactics there, unless one wants WWE to just be nothing more than a totally bland simulated sport. And I could understand it if Bryan's primary goal was to defend the honor of other promotions, but it wasn't. His main objective was to make Cena seem as if he was undeserving of his achievments and had things handed to him- which is not only untrue in regard to both Cena the character and the person, but also makes Bryan seem a lot less sympathetic, and actually kinda dickish. And to be fair, there are sadly a good number of indy feds whose integrity could be put up for debate. Cena's ability and effort aren't up for debate, hence why Bryan comes off so much worse with his I AM RASSLER GRR spiel. There's a lot wrong with it. Vince may love wrestling, but he's gone to great lengths to downplay what business he's in. Along with "superstars" they've been trying to shove "sports-entertainment" down people's throats as a buzzword for decades, and it's never caught on and never will. Now they've moved to just "entertainment". For someone who apparently loves wrestling, Vince is deeply reluctant to use the term to describe his business and the people in it. Calling WWE what it is doesn't turn it into nothing but a bland simulated sport. It's true that WWE does other things, like video games, merchandise, etc....but all of it derives from wrestling. If it's bland, then blame creative. Their job is to make it interesting. If Bryan was claiming that Cena was undeserving of his success, then yes that's unfair. But by nailing his colours to the mast of "sports-entertainment" so ardantly, Cena opens the door to criticism, that he represents the WWE corporate creation of "sports-entertainment", with no appreciation for the grassroots of the business. It's also ironic that the same WWE that Cena professes such love for, has proven itself time and time again to be kayfabe corrupt. They are right now, with their abuse of power towards DB. Cena has some interesting moral standards. WWE, just on its basic ideals, is totally separate from the evil McMahon characters that run it. Cena's loyal to the former, but people tend to forget his character hasn't ever been supportive of the corporate structure. His attitude is identical to Punk's, where he loves the company yet hates the people in charge. At best, he puts up with them because of his love for WWE's fanbase and at worst he's come damn close to losing his job. If he was truly nailing his mast to sports entertainment, he wouldn't have insisted he was just as much of a wrestler as Bryan on the go home Raw before Summerslam. Cena's more or less the epitome of "grassroots" and appreciation. And yeah, Bryan was basically claiming Cena was undeserving of his success. And yep, it was unfair on top of being brain batteringly stupid. I guess they wanted to give Bryan an edge there, but they failed miserably. Also, if someone has to rail against the evils of sports entertainment, the guy that performed the (awesome and amazing) hit song Kane Is Super Smelly probably isn't the ideal choice. |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 26, 2013 0:29:08 GMT -5
There's a lot wrong with it. Vince may love wrestling, but he's gone to great lengths to downplay what business he's in. Along with "superstars" they've been trying to shove "sports-entertainment" down people's throats as a buzzword for decades, and it's never caught on and never will. Now they've moved to just "entertainment". For someone who apparently loves wrestling, Vince is deeply reluctant to use the term to describe his business and the people in it. Calling WWE what it is doesn't turn it into nothing but a bland simulated sport. It's true that WWE does other things, like video games, merchandise, etc....but all of it derives from wrestling. If it's bland, then blame creative. Their job is to make it interesting. If Bryan was claiming that Cena was undeserving of his success, then yes that's unfair. But by nailing his colours to the mast of "sports-entertainment" so ardantly, Cena opens the door to criticism, that he represents the WWE corporate creation of "sports-entertainment", with no appreciation for the grassroots of the business. It's also ironic that the same WWE that Cena professes such love for, has proven itself time and time again to be kayfabe corrupt. They are right now, with their abuse of power towards DB. Cena has some interesting moral standards. WWE, just on its basic ideals, is totally separate from the evil McMahon characters that run it. Cena's loyal to the former, but people tend to forget his character hasn't ever been supportive of the corporate structure. His attitude is identical to Punk's, where he loves the company yet hates the people in charge. At best, he puts up with them because of his love for WWE's fanbase and at worst he's come damn close to losing his job. If was truly nailing his mast to sports entertainment, he wouldn't have insisted he was just as much of a wrestler as Bryan on the go home Raw before Summerslam. Cena's more or less the epitome of "grassroots". And yeah, Bryan was basically claiming Cena was undeserving of his success. And yep, it was unfair on top of being brain batteringly stupid. I guess they wanted to give Bryan an edge there, but they failed miserably. WWE is defined by its on-screen corporate presence. Whether it's Vince, HHH, Steph, Laurenitis etc....They are all corrupt and abusive. There's almost nothing to seperate "WWE" as a distinct ideal, from "WWE" as meaning the ownership and management. Which makes Cena's devotion to it all the more bizarre, and leaves him open to someone else to say "Cena, you're full of shit if THAT is what you stand for". |
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 26, 2013 0:31:58 GMT -5
My main issue with it is the fact that he said earlier in the thread that no matter what Bryan did to try and change or improve on the things he mentioned he didn't like about him that he'd still hate him regardless. That makes no sense. That's not an opinion. that's just blind hate and it deserves no respect or consideration. It's an educated guess based on history. He feels strongly enough based on Bryan's 4 years of WWE work and everything he's done in that stretch that he simply is not capable of doing something to make him a fan, no different of someone being confident that they will never be an Alberto Del Rio fan. To be baffled by that is really quite silly, it's not that complex a thing to grasp. However, to say that it deserves no consideration or respect compared any other opinion is both condescending and asinine. There's no expertise involved in whether or not a wrestler entertains you, it's all taste, and whether someone chooses to write an essay every post or not doesn't affect how much worth their opinion has. No, it's not an educated guess. It was a direct blanket statement suggesting that nothing Bryan could do would ever impress him. Its a preconceived prejudice. And yes, that goes against the very definition of what an opinion is. He didn't initially say that he doesn't *think* Bryan will ever do anything to redeem himself, he said there was nothing he could do, no matter what. That destroys any semblance of logic and reason. He left no room for doubt. He spoke in absolutes. And that is not to be respected. Sorry. That's how debate works. You can't speak in absolutes and expect to be respected. If I said something like I think a certain race is inferior to another, and you asked why, and I just said "Because that's what I think!" it'd be ridiculous. No one would respect that. And if you followed that up with "What could be done to change your mind?" in an attempt to isolate the reason for that thinking and I replied, "Nothing," my opinion would be completely and unequivocally worthless. I would have provided no true insight or reason into what I seemingly believed, and I would have revealed that I have already decided I'll never accept it, no matter what. And that's absurd. |
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Aug 26, 2013 0:50:24 GMT -5
WWE, just on its basic ideals, is totally separate from the evil McMahon characters that run it. Cena's loyal to the former, but people tend to forget his character hasn't ever been supportive of the corporate structure. His attitude is identical to Punk's, where he loves the company yet hates the people in charge. At best, he puts up with them because of his love for WWE's fanbase and at worst he's come damn close to losing his job. If was truly nailing his mast to sports entertainment, he wouldn't have insisted he was just as much of a wrestler as Bryan on the go home Raw before Summerslam. Cena's more or less the epitome of "grassroots". And yeah, Bryan was basically claiming Cena was undeserving of his success. And yep, it was unfair on top of being brain batteringly stupid. I guess they wanted to give Bryan an edge there, but they failed miserably. WWE is defined by its on-screen corporate presence. Whether it's Vince, HHH, Steph, Laurenitis etc....They are all corrupt and abusive. There's almost nothing to seperate "WWE" as a distinct ideal, from "WWE" as meaning the ownership and management. Which makes Cena's devotion to it all the more bizarre, and leaves him open to someone else to say "Cena, you're full of shit if THAT is what you stand for". That wasn't the crux of Bryan's argument, though. He really had no intention of defending the poor downtrodden indy feds in his promos with Cena- he only mentioned the armories to cite how he was allegedly the more worthy of the two. If Cena doesn't care for indies, that's his right to think that. But at least he was willing to show Bryan a degree of respect throughout the buildup to the match. It doesn't paint DBry in a very good light to belittle someone who found him worthy enough to give him a shot at the industry's biggest prize. Long story short, Bryan trying to bite Cena's head off and brand him a corporate tool after he picked him as his next opponent against the wishes of the McMahons (and then went so far as to call the McMahons morons afterwards for not recognizing the ability of smaller superstars), all while still remaining a babyface, is seriously bad writing. I find that a lot more egregious than Cena's fanatical WWE devotion, because as I said before, nothing from him has ever indicated he agrees with the decisions of the powers that be. It's easy to see why the Mr. McMahon character hates his guts- he may have an idea company face in Cena, but it's a face that nevertheless still won't play ball. That's got to drive him batty. |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 26, 2013 0:59:09 GMT -5
WWE is defined by its on-screen corporate presence. Whether it's Vince, HHH, Steph, Laurenitis etc....They are all corrupt and abusive. There's almost nothing to seperate "WWE" as a distinct ideal, from "WWE" as meaning the ownership and management. Which makes Cena's devotion to it all the more bizarre, and leaves him open to someone else to say "Cena, you're full of shit if THAT is what you stand for". That wasn't the crux of Bryan's argument, though. He really had no intention of defending the poor downtrodden indy feds in his promos with Cena- he only mentioned the armories to cite how he was allegedly the more worthy of the two. If Cena doesn't care for indies, that's his right to think that. But at least he was willing to show Bryan a degree of respect throughout the buildup to the match. It doesn't paint DBry in a very good light to belittle someone who recognized his talent and passion enough to give him a shot at the industry's biggest prize. Long story short, Bryan trying to bite Cena's head off and brand him a corporate tool after he picked him as his next opponent against the wishes of the McMahons (and then went so far as to call the McMahons morons afterwards for not recognizing the ability of smaller superstars), all while still remaining a babyface, is seriously bad writing. I find that a lot more egregious than Cena's fanatical WWE devotion, because as I said before, nothing from him has ever indicated he agrees with their decisions. It wasn't the crux of his argument, but it was part of it indirectly, that Cena is representing something that isn't necessarily worthy of respect, even if Cena himself might be. Cena hurts himself by associating so strongly with a devotion to a corrupt organisation, and marginalising and demeaning everything else other than that organisation, which is kayfabe inseperable from the people who govern it and who make those abusive decisions. As for selecting DB, Cena really had the choice made for him. There was such a groundswell of support for DB from the WWE Universe that Cena professes to respect so much, that he couldn't really have chosen anyone else even if he wanted to. |
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Aug 26, 2013 1:05:59 GMT -5
That wasn't the crux of Bryan's argument, though. He really had no intention of defending the poor downtrodden indy feds in his promos with Cena- he only mentioned the armories to cite how he was allegedly the more worthy of the two. If Cena doesn't care for indies, that's his right to think that. But at least he was willing to show Bryan a degree of respect throughout the buildup to the match. It doesn't paint DBry in a very good light to belittle someone who recognized his talent and passion enough to give him a shot at the industry's biggest prize. Long story short, Bryan trying to bite Cena's head off and brand him a corporate tool after he picked him as his next opponent against the wishes of the McMahons (and then went so far as to call the McMahons morons afterwards for not recognizing the ability of smaller superstars), all while still remaining a babyface, is seriously bad writing. I find that a lot more egregious than Cena's fanatical WWE devotion, because as I said before, nothing from him has ever indicated he agrees with their decisions. It wasn't the crux of his argument, but it was part of it indirectly, that Cena is representing something that isn't necessarily worthy of respect, even if Cena himself might be. Cena hurts himself by associating so strongly with a devotion to a corrupt organisation, and marginalising and demeaning everything else other than that organisation, which is kayfabe inseperable from the people who govern it and who make those abusive decisions. As for selecting DB, Cena really had the choice made for him. There was such a groundswell of support for DB from the WWE Universe that Cena professes to respect so much, that he couldn't really have chosen anyone else even if he wanted to. What would imply he wanted to pick someone else? Note how Cena made a grand spectacle of his decision, one could assume he wanted to put DBry on a level above the rest of the roster. |
|
|
|
Post by revolver86 on Aug 26, 2013 1:25:44 GMT -5
I love DB as much as a lot of people on this forum. But I hate the Miz because I just friggin' hate his stupid face and his wrestling style bores me to tears, heel or face. No one will ever convince me to like him, I've already decided. Let Zaq have this one. I'd be Zaq when the Miz love was at it's peak, a few years ago. It must be even worse, when he's like, the only guy that puts these topics up. I actually give Buzzkill a lot of credit, here.
|
|
|
|
Post by salsashark on Aug 26, 2013 1:28:54 GMT -5
I don't mind negative threads about a wrestler I like, as long as they have something substantial and thorough to say. The same goes for the opposite.
But if you are going to hate for hating's sake and outright say that nothing can ever change your opinion on a guy, that's so goddamn boring. I don't look at people who hate Sheamus (one of my overall least favorites) and just blindly say that he sucks as having anything substantial to contribute to any conversation. Wow, really, you don't like him? Great! What people should be doing is articulating their dislike or trying to put arguments out there against people if they really care about their opinions enough. I mean, you made a negative Daniel Bryan thread. You obviously think the guy is shit, so at least indulge us by sharing specifics of why he blows and what he could possibly do to change your opinion. Maybe if he turned into an anti-Daniel-Bryan character--someone who only does hoss offense and is a sneering and unrelatable dick heel? (I'm serious.)
Also, not ever being willing to change your opinions doesn't make you cooler. It makes you look stubborn and unreasonable. People change opinions all the time--or at least tweak them--because the whole point of life is to change and grow as things change and grow around you. For example, I hated Cena a while back. Just f***ing hated him. Then, the CM Punk feud came along, and then the Rock feud, and then I realized, 'Hey, this guy pours his heart into matches/feuds where either he loses or looks like an unintentional heel,' and that changed my opinion of him. His character isn't great, but he as a wrestler has several redeemable qualities.
I also believe I could be endeared to like Sheamus at some point. Tone down the constant, totally unsubtle references to his Irish background (Come on, this guy can be way more interesting than that) and make him look like less of a mean-spirited prick as a face, and I could become a fan.
On the flip side, I was once a huge CM Punk fan, then I saw faults with him that others pointed out, which toned down my fandom. Right now, I've become a pretty big Punk fan again, but I don't regard him as the be-all, end-all I once thought he could be because the evidence has changed. It's kind of cool to be able to not just justify an opinion but also carry a mind open enough to tweak or even alter it.
Anyway, some things I don't like about Daniel Bryan:
-He has yet to deliver the promo that will make his WWE career--the thing that we will look back on many years from now as something that indicated why he was a top dog (or should have been considered one). I don't know if it's coming. I hope it is. That NXT promo with Cole was so close, and so was the Cena one. He's just not there yet.
-The beard thing is getting gimmicky in the bad way. Since they have merchandise, there's not really a chance they'll abandon the beard soon, but this just affixes a kind of "trendy" thing to him that he is, in a sense, bigger than. He already has "YES" and "NO." Those are his catchy, simple elements. Let the beard go.
-He still does corpse once in a while. Not really crazy about that.
-The Knee is awesome, but he needs a better non-submission finisher than that.
|
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,016
|
Post by nate5054 on Aug 26, 2013 1:29:43 GMT -5
Screw your negative threads.
I'm leaving this thread in a Prius!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Portable Stove on Aug 26, 2013 1:29:55 GMT -5
I'm also on Team "Shave the Beard". Hell, or at least trim it down, since he might look worse at this point without it. Also, I feel that, and I can't say for sure this is a negative towards him or his fans, but he's being set up for a huge fall at some point, which is going to cause another eruption. Which I'll probably be joining in with.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Portable Stove on Aug 26, 2013 1:30:47 GMT -5
I love DB as much as a lot of people on this forum. But I hate the Miz because I just friggin' hate his stupid face and his wrestling style bores me to tears, heel or face. No one will ever convince me to like him, I've already decided. Let Zaq have this one. I'd be Zaq when the Miz love was at it's peak, a few years ago. It must be even worse, when he's like, the only guy that puts these topics up. I actually give Buzzkill a lot of credit, here. ...there was Miz love?  |
|
nate5054
Hank Scorpio
Lucky to be alive in the Chris Jericho Era
Posts: 7,016
|
Post by nate5054 on Aug 26, 2013 1:30:58 GMT -5
He's too compelling. He has too much passion. He puts too much effort into every single thing he does. He's too good. See what I've done there, the negatives are positives. I bet you're spectacular at the "What's Your Greatest Weakness" question in a job interview. |
|
|
|
Post by Nic Nemeth on Aug 26, 2013 1:31:04 GMT -5
I didn't like how overpushed he was originally but when he became the slimy heel champion, I instantly loved him especially with Cole slowly turning for him.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 26, 2013 3:12:25 GMT -5
I don't mind negative threads about a wrestler I like, as long as they have something substantial and thorough to say. The same goes for the opposite. But if you are going to hate for hating's sake and outright say that nothing can ever change your opinion on a guy, that's so goddamn boring. I don't look at people who hate Sheamus (one of my overall least favorites) and just blindly say that he sucks as having anything substantial to contribute to any conversation. Wow, really, you don't like him? Great! What people should be doing is articulating their dislike or trying to put arguments out there against people if they really care about their opinions enough. I mean, you made a negative Daniel Bryan thread. You obviously think the guy is shit, so at least indulge us by sharing specifics of why he blows and what he could possibly do to change your opinion. Maybe if he turned into an anti-Daniel-Bryan character--someone who only does hoss offense and is a sneering and unrelatable dick heel? (I'm serious.) Also, not ever being willing to change your opinions doesn't make you cooler. It makes you look stubborn and unreasonable. People change opinions all the time--or at least tweak them--because the whole point of life is to change and grow as things change and grow around you. For example, I hated Cena a while back. Just f***ing hated him. Then, the CM Punk feud came along, and then the Rock feud, and then I realized, 'Hey, this guy pours his heart into matches/feuds where either he loses or looks like an unintentional heel,' and that changed my opinion of him. His character isn't great, but he as a wrestler has several redeemable qualities. I also believe I could be endeared to like Sheamus at some point. Tone down the constant, totally unsubtle references to his Irish background (Come on, this guy can be way more interesting than that) and make him look like less of a mean-spirited prick as a face, and I could become a fan. On the flip side, I was once a huge CM Punk fan, then I saw faults with him that others pointed out, which toned down my fandom. Right now, I've become a pretty big Punk fan again, but I don't regard him as the be-all, end-all I once thought he could be because the evidence has changed. It's kind of cool to be able to not just justify an opinion but also carry a mind open enough to tweak or even alter it. This post should be emblazoned on the front page and be prerequisite reading before even posting. Bravo, sir. Bravo. |
|
