|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jan 27, 2014 11:43:48 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore Random insertion into the title picture shouldn't be necessary. WWE should have booked a logical storyline leading to it in the first instance. People don't care if Bryan in the title match makes any sense or not, because WWE have already emphasised that common sense booking means nothing to them. |
|
shaker
Team Rocket
The numbers don't lie - and they spell disaster for you at Sacrifice!
Posts: 779
|
Post by shaker on Jan 27, 2014 11:46:12 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore It is logical, though. He never once lost fairly to Orton. His winning the Rumble would have guaranteed another title shot at Mania. And he may have lost to Bray, but he pretty decisively won over the Wyatt family as a whole by infiltrating them, beating the holy hell out of Bray, and triumphing over any kind of brainwashing. |
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 27, 2014 11:52:11 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore It is logical, though. He never once lost fairly to Orton. His winning the Rumble would have guaranteed another title shot at Mania. And he may have lost to Bray, but he pretty decisively won over the Wyatt family as a whole by infiltrating them, beating the holy hell out of Bray, and triumphing over any kind of brainwashing. Big Show never lost fairly to Orton either and Cena just lost his last match with Orton unfairly too. It's because people like Bryan more, not because it makes more sense |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 11:53:09 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... |
|
shaker
Team Rocket
The numbers don't lie - and they spell disaster for you at Sacrifice!
Posts: 779
|
Post by shaker on Jan 27, 2014 11:57:00 GMT -5
It is logical, though. He never once lost fairly to Orton. His winning the Rumble would have guaranteed another title shot at Mania. And he may have lost to Bray, but he pretty decisively won over the Wyatt family as a whole by infiltrating them, beating the holy hell out of Bray, and triumphing over any kind of brainwashing. Big Show never lost fairly to Orton either and Cena just lost his last match with Orton unfairly too. It's because people like Bryan more, not because it makes more sense Bryan literally had the strap taken away from him the night after winning it. Cena and Show never got that close. No argument that people like Bryan more, but he kayfabe has much more a claim to being champ than anyone else right now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 12:02:50 GMT -5
Now I've had time to really think it over and be a bit more rational I'm going back to my original opinion that this is all a work.
I know WWE are short sighted and idiotic at times, but even they cant be this dumb.
I mean they've worked up their whole fanbase and are generating the most heat since Montreal.
WWE have history of working the fans and the roster, so it's not like this is a new thing.
Hell, they've got unreal heat on Batista right now. He's easily the #1 heel and Bryuan is the #1 face, the logical match to run at Mania would be Bryan V Batista. I think they'll either get the title on Bryan next month. Or that they'll run a Triple threat so that Bryan can get resolution with Orton as well.
If that is what's going on, then Kudos to WWE, I don't think they've ever manipulated my emotions so strongly.
|
|
|
|
Post by simplydurhamcalling on Jan 27, 2014 12:11:17 GMT -5
I think it is a work but I'm not sure it's all worth it just yet.
Turn Batista heel tonight (or ASAP) and have him take the title from Orton...which would make perfect sense following friction between Orton and The Authority and The Authority bringing Batista back.
Put the #1 contendership on the line in the Elimination Chamber, say Bryan vs Lesnar vs Orton vs Punk vs Reigns vs Ambrose. Bryan wins and I would use this to set up either Punk vs Lesnar 2 or Lesnar vs Taker and Reigns vs Ambrose.
Then you have Bryan vs Batista (The Authority) at Mania.
IF they follow that path then I'd be delighted but I don't see it happening. As things stand 'Mania 30 is a non-purchase (which I never thought would be the case) but that could still change.
|
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 27, 2014 12:20:17 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore Bryan shouldn't have been wasting time with that midcarder to begin with. WWE should've been elevating other midcarders to work with Bray Wyatt. Someone is going to say that they need strong heels. Well that's because WWE short sightedly turned Big Show and Mark Henry face just to give Lesnar someone big to lift. The entire booking for the past six months has been screwy. If a wrestler is over, he should be rewarded in some shape or form. It doesn't matter if it's Daniel Bryan or anyone else, overness should be rewarded. And you're damn right I want Daniel Bryan in the title match. It makes sense because that's his true goal. The Wyatts were a detour. He can just say "Now, what was I doing again? Oh yeah, winning the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. YESx10000. |
|
thirteen3
Dennis Stamp
posted with a broken freakin neck keyboard
Posts: 3,969 
|
Post by thirteen3 on Jan 27, 2014 12:22:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Jan 27, 2014 12:23:09 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore Well see, if they had listened to the fans even in the slightest, they wouldn't have had him lose to the midcarder clean. Sighting part of the problem with last night doesn't explain away the problem from last night. And a lot of people have a claim to the title, but they all made a claim AFTER Bryan got screwed out of it twice so it also would make sense that since he was the one wronged first and the most by the people in charge that he'd be the one to take them down. John Cena and Big Show are honestly the only ones out of your choices that actually hav a claim. Punk lost in the Rumble and Lesnar just said he wanted a shot and cheated to beat the Big Show. Not sure how that puts them in front of Bryan. SO no, I won't admit I think Bryan should win because I like him. I think he should win because it does make the most sense. Cena makes the second most sense and I don't think he's getting it done either. If anything Batista being the one to tkae out Orton makes absolutley no sense unless HHH backs him now as the face of the WWE. |
|
Some Guy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,950
Member is Online
|
Post by Some Guy on Jan 27, 2014 12:53:41 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... Honestly, I thought it should have ended with the Sister Abigail into the barricade on a count out, with Bryan looking passed out and coming back later in the night to conquer. They then could do Bryan/Bray at EC again, and Bryan could pull that one out. Instead, Bryan loses to Bray so that he can be built up to lose to Cena. That's your WWE logic. |
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 27, 2014 12:59:51 GMT -5
So for all the "WWE needs to go with the only logical decision" arguments, now we've gotten people saying how a guy who just lost to a midcarder clean as a whistle should randomly be inserted into the title match for no reason other than "the crowd cheered for him." What about CM Punk? He got screwed by Kane, shouldn't he have more of a claim? Or John Cena getting distracted by the Wyatts? Or Brock Lesnar for killing Big Show? Or Big Show for getting cheated in his match? The point I'm trying to make is I think some people need to stop hiding behind all the business bullshit and just flat out say "I want Daniel Bryan in the title match because I like him and I don't care if it makes sense or no sense at all, I just want it to happen." Then at least the arguments for logistics reasons can stop since they won't be argued anymore That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? |
|
|
|
Post by gnr123 on Jan 27, 2014 13:02:30 GMT -5
That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? How do they expect to sell a WrestleMania main event with the most popular guy on the roster not in the match? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 13:05:27 GMT -5
That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? How do you expect to sell a Wrestlemania main event based around two washed up guys that almost no one who goes to these shows cares about? |
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 27, 2014 13:05:29 GMT -5
Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? How do they expect to sell a WrestleMania main event with the most popular guy on the roster not in the match? Because Daniel Bryan isn't the biggest draw, meaning him not main eventing isn't going to ruin the buyrate Then again they seem to think Cena vs Bray Wyatt would draw money so they are dumb in that regard |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 13:06:58 GMT -5
That's the thing. WWE should be the ones to book it so it makes sense Daniel Bryan wins. You're right, Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost to Bray Wyatt clean then enter the Rumble and win. Daniel Bryan shouldn't have lost clean to Bray Wyatt full stop. None of the other top faces do, so he shouldn't either. It should have ended in a DQ after Harper and Rowan interference. Bryan enters the Rumble later, eliminates Harper and Rowan, and wins the match. Makes perfect sense to me. And again, you're right about Daniel Bryan vs Randy Orton. That match has been done enough. So why not do Bryan/Cena II for the title? Or a triple threat with Bryan/Orton/Punk? You seem to be very narrow-minded with your ideas to booking. You also seem to blaming the fans for WWE's nonsensical booking. They should be booking the show around the most over guy on the roster. Not booking what they like, then saying "Well Bryan being in that match doesn't make any sense because of all this other stuff".... Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? The logical storyline is the guy who is the most over, winning in the main event at WrestleMania. Simple as. A rematch taking place at WrestleMania? Hmm, that doesn't sound like WWE at all. It's not like last year featured Rock/Cena and Brock/HHH, both of which had been done on PPV within the previous year. WWE has no problem selling trying to sell rematches on PPV. They'll likely have a harder time trying to sell a match where the fans shit all over the two guys in it and chant for a 3rd guy who's not even in the match. |
|
|
|
Post by gnr123 on Jan 27, 2014 13:07:08 GMT -5
How do they expect to sell a WrestleMania main event with the most popular guy on the roster not in the match? Because Daniel Bryan isn't the biggest draw, meaning him not main eventing isn't going to ruin the buyrate Then again they seem to think Cena vs Bray Wyatt would draw money so they are dumb in that regard You can't be a draw if WWE doesn't book you as one. Stone Cold wasn't a massive draw when they began to push him, he got over organically and the WWE pushed him accordingly, thus him being the biggest merchandise seller for the company. |
|
|
|
Post by Piccolo on Jan 27, 2014 13:07:46 GMT -5
Is every WM world title match gonna be a triple threat now? Why on earth would you think that? Doing something once doesn't mean you have to repeat it every year around that same time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2014 13:08:01 GMT -5
How do they expect to sell a WrestleMania main event with the most popular guy on the roster not in the match? Because Daniel Bryan isn't the biggest draw, meaning him not main eventing isn't going to ruin the buyrate Then again they seem to think Cena vs Bray Wyatt would draw money so they are dumb in that regard Randy Orton isn't a draw either. Batista also hasn't proved anything outside of one good Raw rating. |
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jan 27, 2014 13:11:56 GMT -5
Great so I'm narrow minded now because I want booking to follow a logical storyline instead of a "HE'S POPULAR, SCREW ALL OUR STORYLINES AND GIVE HIM THE TITLE" stuff. Bryan/Cena for the title at Mania is literally THE SAME MATCH AS SUMMERSLAM. There's nothing different about it outside of Triple H not being the referee. How the hell do you expect to sell a WrestleMania main event that literally happened half a year earlier with the same exact story? The logical storyline is the guy who is the most over, winning in the main event at WrestleMania. Simple as. A rematch taking place at WrestleMania? Hmm, that doesn't sound like WWE at all. It's not like last year featured Rock/Cena and Brock/HHH, both of which had been done on PPV within the previous year. WWE has no problem selling trying to sell rematches on PPV. They'll likely have a harder time trying to sell a match where the fans shit all over the two guys in it and chant for a 3rd guy who's not even in the match. Rock Cena was done one year ago ONCE. Bryan/Orton was done 6 months ago literally 10 times in 2013. And Brock/HHH is a match that everyone here said shouldn't have been done, but at least that had a different story with Triple H needing to win to avenge Vince McMahon and his loss at SummerSlam. Bryan/Cena would go from "I'm gonna show the world that I can do this by winning the title from Cena" to "I'm gonna show the world that I can do this by winning the title from Cena" |
|
