saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Nov 27, 2013 17:18:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Nov 27, 2013 17:26:21 GMT -5
Not giving Bryan a proper title run at Summerslam was the single biggest mistake this company made this year. This whole evil authority angle could have been brewing for a few weeks and have culminated with the Orton/HHH heel turn at a later PPV like HIAC or Survivor Series. I said this in the Cena/Bryan thread that's gone 7 pages, but imagine if the night after Wrestlemania 14 Vince McMahon screwed Austin out of the title. It wouldn't make any sense. It took McMahon SIX months before he really got the upper hand over Austin, but in the meantime he threw obstacles in Austin's way (Dude Love, Kane, the Undertaker, the Stooges) so that Austin's momentum would be hindered. That's what made WWF TV in 1998 compelling: who would get the upper hand this week? How will McMahon or Austin respond next week? I so have to tune in to find out! This is why Bryan fans are annoyed: he didn't get a chance to build momentum as the champion! Yeah, he's a two-time WWE champion for a total of, what, 36 hours? And yet you read from other people that Bryan fans should count their stars that their guy was lucky enough to sniff the title that long. And then WWE booked a bunch of shows that left Bryan looking like a chump laying on the mat, who only got some comeuppance with the help of the midcard guys. And now he's feuding with the Wyatt Family so that his upper midcard/lower main event credibility will run off on them. Imagine if Steve Austin in 1998 was booked to put the Nation over strong in a series of matches after he was screwed by McMahon. It wouldn't make any sense. But this is what WWE is doing now. Why? Because the people who book WWE TV like to think they can make their own reality. For instance, Zack Ryder gets over with the internet crowd. The internet crowd makes noise at WWE shows. Other fans join in. Zack Ryder gets public support from guys like John Cena and the Rock. Was Ryder the most exciting talent at the time? Not necessarily, but he did have an underdog aura to him, like Rudy wanting to play football. That's all Ryder wanted, a shot at the big time. And despite the fact that he's not the greatest talker and flashiest wrestler, he had fan support. Accentuate the positives, hide the negatives. But what did WWE do? They booked Ryder to the Brutus Beefcake to Cena's Hogan, having Ryder get his ass kicked repeatedly by Kane. Did Ryder ever get any comeuppance? Well, if you count that throwaway battle royale match on Smackdown for the Guest GM spot that one time when he eliminated Kane to win the match. But that was like 6-8 months after all the bullshit with Kane happened. Then, to top it off, Ryder was made to look like a chump by Eve Torres. Did Ryder pair up with a Diva so that she would get her comeuppance? Nope, he took that kick to the balls in stride. In this case, Ryder was booked like a loser and after he fizzled out, WWE believed it was right for not pushing him in the first place. WWE set up the conditions to prove their own idea of who should be pushed right. It'd be like if you cut the arms and legs off of Ryder, saddled him with an anvil, left him out at sea in shark-infested waters without a life preserver, and then said "you better swim to shore, buddy!" WWE in this case purposefully handicapped the guy and then expected him to get over with those handicaps. Accentuate the negatives, hide the positives. Stephanie McMahon is Paul Heyman upside down. The same thing happened with Punk. Boy, it's a real shocker that when you give John Cena and AJ Lee a lot of focus on television at the expense of the WWE champion that maybe the champion won't be able to draw in ratings or PPV buyrates like you had hoped. Gee, I wonder why. And it's going to be the same thing with Bryan. Hell, didn't WWE announce that the Summerslam buyrate was lower than they had expected? Obviously it's Bryan's fault. It can't be Cena's fault whatsoever. It can't be the petty worked shoot promo bullshit they had on TV to promote the match. Nope, it's all indie vanilla midget goatboy's fault, obviously. Vince McMahon makes his own reality, hell, his own 'universe'. We should just be good, thankful little fans and be grateful that we get to see any 'sports entertainment' at all because of him. *rolls eyes* I agree that Ryder could've went better (though his gimmick would've wore out and kinda did for me), but I don't see how CM Punk can be used as an example here. He had a longer WWE Championship reign than anyone in the modern era and if it was seriously a problem, they could've just taken it away at any time. Besides, the crowds wanted AJ so you can't fault them for making her more of a focus. And the SummerSlam buyrate being low could've been from so many things. There's no way to tell what or who caused it to be so low and I doubt anyone in WWE is seriously blaming Bryan for it.
|
|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Nov 27, 2013 17:26:47 GMT -5
Hey, it's cool, next time WWE tries to overpush a guy they really want me to get behind because they haven't elevated credible upper midcard talent to slot in for their injured/retiring main-eventers, I simply won't, because I really don't feel like putting the time, energy, or money into someone just to have the company dick around with my support. Again. It's their loss, not mine. I get to keep my money and time. *shrugs*
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Nov 27, 2013 17:33:22 GMT -5
I absolutely respect Zack Ryder's attempts of using social networking to elevate his name and gain some recognition. But his ceiling was being the equivalent of Brutus Beefcake. Decent guy. Solid wrestler. But I never at any moment looked at him and thought main eventer. The difference between him and Bryan was when the WWE attempted to de-push Bryan with the 17 second incident at Wrestlemania, the crowd responded by cheering for Bryan more. That very same night, when the company did the same to Ryder by having him punked by Eve, they didn't seem to care.
What I'm saying is that if the fans truly cared for Zack the way they do Bryan, they would cheer for him in spite of how he's booked.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Nov 27, 2013 17:36:29 GMT -5
I absolutely respect Zack Ryder's attempts of using social networking to elevate his name and gain some recognition. But his ceiling was being the equivalent of Brutus Beefcake. Decent guy. Solid wrestler. But I never at any moment looked at him and thought main eventer. The difference between him and Bryan was when the WWE attempted to de-push Bryan with the 17 second incident at Wrestlemania, the crowd responded by cheering for Bryan more. That very same night, when the company did the same to Ryder by having him punked by Eve, they didn't seem to care. What I'm saying is that if the fans truly cared for Zack the way they do Bryan, they would cheer for him in spite of how he's booked. Because Bryan was booked like a chump until his partnership with Kane got both of them over. Again, 18 seconds wasn't de-pushing, it's called story telling. Daniel Bryan, the smug son of a bitch piece of shit finally got what he had coming to him. You put a crowd like Sacramento there and they'd gone ballistic for Sheamus doing that and not Bryan losing
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Nov 27, 2013 17:38:24 GMT -5
I absolutely respect Zack Ryder's attempts of using social networking to elevate his name and gain some recognition. But his ceiling was being the equivalent of Brutus Beefcake. Decent guy. Solid wrestler. But I never at any moment looked at him and thought main eventer. The difference between him and Bryan was when the WWE attempted to de-push Bryan with the 17 second incident at Wrestlemania, the crowd responded by cheering for Bryan more. That very same night, when the company did the same to Ryder by having him punked by Eve, they didn't seem to care. What I'm saying is that if the fans truly cared for Zack the way they do Bryan, they would cheer for him in spite of how he's booked. Because Bryan was booked like a chump until his partnership with Kane got both of them over. Again, 18 seconds wasn't de-pushing, it's called story telling. Daniel Bryan, the smug son of a bitch piece of shit finally got what he had coming to him. You put a crowd like Sacramento there and they'd gone ballistic for Sheamus doing that and not Bryan losing De-pushing isn't necessarily the word I should have chosen, but for arguably their best technical wrestler to lose like that at their biggest PPV seemed to strike a chord with fans.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Nov 27, 2013 17:48:05 GMT -5
Again, 18 seconds wasn't de-pushing, it's called story telling. Daniel Bryan, the smug son of a bitch piece of shit finally got what he had coming to him. You put a crowd like Sacramento there and they'd gone ballistic for Sheamus doing that and not Bryan losing De-pushing isn't necessarily the word I should have chosen, but for arguably their best technical wrestler to lose like that at their biggest PPV seemed to strike a chord with fans. Technical wrestling skill is completely meaningless in the context of character story telling like that. I don't care how good of a wrestler someone is, I care about their character. That's what matters first. Daniel Bryan's character at the time was that of a cocky asshole who thought he was better than everyone and acted like he could do anything he wanted. Sheamus proved him wrong at the biggest show of the year. The idea was to put Sheamus over as this huge babyface who finally put Bryan in his place, only because of that ONE crowd, it got ruined
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Nov 27, 2013 17:53:03 GMT -5
Exhibit A is not valid, because WWE have "told" the fans to like Bryan since he started with the company. I agree that Bryan has been groomed for a top spot since he signed, but on Monday you had fans chanting "DANIEL BRYAN" over a promo between the two guys WWE has pushed over, and over, and over again (with one of them never truly achieving the popularity Bryan has already enjoyed). Do you think WWE will respond positively to this action? As an extra note, I remembered one of the recent moments when I felt like WWE was really trying to put down the longtime fans. That moment was when the anonymous GM was revealed as Hornswoggle. The lack of respect for the longtime viewer and their investment in the story was staggering. All the time spent, and all of the speculation wasted on a throwaway joke about the dwarf. I don't think its going to change anything. Vince and company aren't going to have Bryan lose his feud with the Wyatts because people are cheering for him over Cena. They're also not suddenly going to drop whatever their plans are and reinsert him into the Authority angle. Not just yet.
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Nov 27, 2013 17:55:09 GMT -5
Exhibit A is not valid, because WWE have "told" the fans to like Bryan since he started with the company. Yeah right. A losing streak on NXT, Michael Cole constantly telling everyone how much of a loser he is, and 18 seconds. If it hadn't been the huge uproar after WrestleMania 28, Bryan would probably still be wrestling in the midcards for the US title or something. Cole running him down and 18 seconds both helped Bryan. They didn't hurt him. And WWE knew this when they did it.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Nov 27, 2013 17:57:59 GMT -5
De-pushing isn't necessarily the word I should have chosen, but for arguably their best technical wrestler to lose like that at their biggest PPV seemed to strike a chord with fans. Technical wrestling skill is completely meaningless in the context of character story telling like that. I don't care how good of a wrestler someone is, I care about their character. That's what matters first. Daniel Bryan's character at the time was that of a cocky asshole who thought he was better than everyone and acted like he could do anything he wanted. Sheamus proved him wrong at the biggest show of the year. The idea was to put Sheamus over as this huge babyface who finally put Bryan in his place, only because of that ONE crowd, it got ruined But that reaction carried over beyond that crowd. If it were an anomaly where the following week's crowd didn't do it, then sure. But the crowd's reception towards Bryan got bigger to the point where they finally just turned him face while teaming with Kane.
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Nov 27, 2013 18:03:44 GMT -5
Unless you consider all of this negative attention was a way to put the fans on his side. There are easier ways to do that. Goldberg managed to get fan support. He didn't need Tony Schiavone constantly saying "this guy's a loser, he's boring, what a goon, he sucks!!!". Even an underdog can be booked more positively than that. So, Daniel Bryan should have been booked as an unstoppable beast from Day One, just like Goldberg? This guy should have been cast in the role of this guy? I don't think it would have worked, because it doesn't play to Bryan's strengths. He's a great wrestler, but physically unassuming (in terms of the WWE Universe). He's not exactly a great talker either. So to help him stand out, they put Bryan in the role he's best suited for: the underdog.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2013 18:12:26 GMT -5
Yeah right. A losing streak on NXT, Michael Cole constantly telling everyone how much of a loser he is, and 18 seconds. If it hadn't been the huge uproar after WrestleMania 28, Bryan would probably still be wrestling in the midcards for the US title or something. Cole running him down and 18 seconds both helped Bryan. They didn't hurt him. And WWE knew this when they did it.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Nov 27, 2013 18:26:56 GMT -5
Technical wrestling skill is completely meaningless in the context of character story telling like that. I don't care how good of a wrestler someone is, I care about their character. That's what matters first. Daniel Bryan's character at the time was that of a cocky asshole who thought he was better than everyone and acted like he could do anything he wanted. Sheamus proved him wrong at the biggest show of the year. The idea was to put Sheamus over as this huge babyface who finally put Bryan in his place, only because of that ONE crowd, it got ruined But that reaction carried over beyond that crowd. If it were an anomaly where the following week's crowd didn't do it, then sure. But the crowd's reception towards Bryan got bigger to the point where they finally just turned him face while teaming with Kane. It carried over because fans liked chanting it. It just so happened that it was associated with Bryan. Look at Daniel Bryan from when he won the World Title to right before WrestleMania. He either got no reaction or was getting booed out of the building. You take that ONE crowd away who just happened to really like Bryan and none of us this ever happens.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Nov 27, 2013 18:34:45 GMT -5
But that reaction carried over beyond that crowd. If it were an anomaly where the following week's crowd didn't do it, then sure. But the crowd's reception towards Bryan got bigger to the point where they finally just turned him face while teaming with Kane. It carried over because fans liked chanting it. It just so happened that it was associated with Bryan. Look at Daniel Bryan from when he won the World Title to right before WrestleMania. He either got no reaction or was getting booed out of the building. You take that ONE crowd away who just happened to really like Bryan and none of us this ever happens. Hell, you just have a normal 10-15 minute match at WrestleMania, and there's a fair chance that none of it ever happens.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Nov 27, 2013 18:47:13 GMT -5
Cole running him down and 18 seconds both helped Bryan. They didn't hurt him. And WWE knew this when they did it.Yeah, I gotta call bullshit on that one. WWE had no idea 18 seconds would lead to the "YES!" chant being one of the most over things of the year. They saw Bryan as expendable and were willing to sacrifice him to make Sheamus look like a beast. As it just so happens, they caught the lucky break of a lifetime and Bryan ended up getting more over than he's ever been. If I was booking the match, I probably would have done something similar to what WWE did (wouldn't have it be the opener though) but I sure as hell wouldn't have had Bryan's best interests in mind.
|
|
|
Post by Next Level was WRONG on Nov 27, 2013 18:48:03 GMT -5
Yeah right. A losing streak on NXT, Michael Cole constantly telling everyone how much of a loser he is, and 18 seconds. If it hadn't been the huge uproar after WrestleMania 28, Bryan would probably still be wrestling in the midcards for the US title or something. 1. Losing streak was to build sympathy. The entire rest of the show was centered around him and the first episode started with him alone in the ring cutting a promo, they literally put as much focus on him as possible. 2. Michael Cole's commentary was no different from Lawler running down Bret Hart or Heenan talking shit about Hogan or Bossman. WWE has used heel commentators running down the babyfaces as a tactic to get them over for twenty goddamn years. 3. 18 seconds was a heel getting his comeuppance for cashing in on Big Show and being a dickhead to everyone including his girlfriend since then. It could have been anyone in Daniel Bryan's role, they picked him for it, because, surprise, they thought he was talented to pull it off. WWE have Bryan out to be a big deal since the second he debuted.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Nov 27, 2013 18:48:04 GMT -5
Yeah right. A losing streak on NXT, Michael Cole constantly telling everyone how much of a loser he is, and 18 seconds. Unless you consider all of this negative attention was a way to put the fans on his side. No, it wasn't. Daniel Bryan got over despite the negative attention.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Nov 27, 2013 18:50:39 GMT -5
It carried over because fans liked chanting it. It just so happened that it was associated with Bryan. Look at Daniel Bryan from when he won the World Title to right before WrestleMania. He either got no reaction or was getting booed out of the building. You take that ONE crowd away who just happened to really like Bryan and none of us this ever happens. Hell, you just have a normal 10-15 minute match at WrestleMania, and there's a fair chance that none of it ever happens. I doubt it, I still maintain that that crowd would have still acted the same no matter how Bryan lost
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Nov 27, 2013 18:51:09 GMT -5
Unless you consider all of this negative attention was a way to put the fans on his side. No, it wasn't. Daniel Bryan got over despite the negative attention. I remember when Bryan was on that NXT losing streak, everybody kept saying, "Wait and see! His first win will be a big deal!" Then his first win ended up being a rollup victory over Santino Marella on RAW in an 8-on-4 handicap match. TBF, WWE may have actually seen something in Bryan but it was obvious they had no idea what in the actual f*** they were doing.
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Nov 27, 2013 19:00:28 GMT -5
Yes, yes they do. And they resent Daniel Bryan and CM Punk for getting themselves over in the face of corporate resistance, the way Triple H never could. Don't you want to see Punk and Bryan trounce all those pricks and claw their way to the top? Will they make it??? Keep watching the shows and buying their merchandise to find out!
Marks.
|
|