Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2014 20:09:41 GMT -5
If he's in it, and doesn't win it, they haven't learned a damn thing. That crowd will be booing to high heaven. Even at this point, if they pull him from the match, the damage is done. I could maaaaaybe see Ziggler getting away with winning, honestly even then not entirely, but anyone else, nope, they're hung. We need to come up with the Roman equivalent of Bootista. Disdeigns?
|
|
Sicho100
Hank Scorpio
Easily Confused.
Posts: 5,964
|
Post by Sicho100 on Dec 31, 2014 20:09:57 GMT -5
Bryan V Lesnar would be the better match and storyline.
but at the end of the day Reigns is alot younger than Bryan, they don't need to give all that heat they got on Brock to someone the same age as Cena.
they need to give it to someone young and I think Romans their guy, he oozes charisma, is a fast moving powerhouse wrestler who's character is going to strike a major chord with a world obsessed with dark and edgy superhero movies. I still maintain though that Reigns is being pushed no harder than the other 2 Shield members, He's just being pushed in a more obvious way John Cena is 37 years old. Daniel Bryan is 33 years old. Roman Reigns is 29 years old. What do you mean by "a lot" younger than Bryan? Bryan's also not the same age as Cena. He's 33, that's around the age most wrestlers are when they're in their prime. Not to speak for @graant, but, to me, it's mostly about wrestling years. Cena and Bryan both started wrestling in 1999. Reigns started in 2010. That's a decade's worth of wear-and-tear that both Cena and Bryan have that Reigns doesn't. You know how quite often someone will start a thread on here asking how much longer Cena has left? The answer is likely, "About as long as Daniel Bryan." Roman Reigns, on the other hand? The WWE has plenty of time to make money with him (so long as nothing unexpected happens, like Reigns suffering a career-ending injury or leaving the company a la Rock).
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Dec 31, 2014 20:10:12 GMT -5
Hopefully 2015 won't be the year of the message board contrarian gimmick. It's been played out. So we're back to the point where anyone who disagrees is a contrarian or a 'troll'? I can feel my 'leave Britney alone' mascara running already You're on thin ice.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Dec 31, 2014 20:10:50 GMT -5
Hopefully 2015 won't be the year of the message board contrarian gimmick. It's been played out. So we're back to the point where anyone who disagrees is a contrarian or a 'troll'? Anyone that disagrees? No.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Dec 31, 2014 20:13:02 GMT -5
Sorry but the whole 'Bryan not being pushed is an OJ trial level of injustice' thing contributed towards the suckiness of the product, it didn't detract from it. I can feel the '...or we riot' bandwagon rumbling again and it fills me with absolute dread. If they want to push Bryan - fine. If it makes sense to push him - fine. But let's not get to a stage where we have organised 'hijacks' to make it happen again. Nor 'letscrapoveranythingnotbryanism' again
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 31, 2014 20:13:22 GMT -5
WWE should count themselves lucky. They have a chance to correct their mistakes from last year's Rumble.
I find it amusing that the prevailing rumour is that they haven't learned a damn thing, and seem to be once again pushing their own preferences over the organic responses of the crowd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2014 20:14:05 GMT -5
Sorry but the whole 'Bryan not being pushed is an OJ trial level of injustice' thing contributed towards the suckiness of the product, it didn't detract from it. I can feel the '...or we riot' bandwagon rumbling again and it fills me with absolute dread. If they want to push Bryan - fine. If it makes sense to push him - fine. But let's not get to a stage where we have organised 'hijacks' to make it happen again. Why not? If people don't like what's going on, why shouldn't they be showing their displeasure? Especially given it worked perfectly last year?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 31, 2014 20:14:59 GMT -5
Sorry but the whole 'Bryan not being pushed is an OJ trial level of injustice' thing contributed towards the suckiness of the product, it didn't detract from it. I can feel the '...or we riot' bandwagon rumbling again and it fills me with absolute dread. If they want to push Bryan - fine. If it makes sense to push him - fine. But let's not get to a stage where we have organised 'hijacks' to make it happen again. If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Dec 31, 2014 20:14:59 GMT -5
Sorry but the whole 'Bryan not being pushed is an OJ trial level of injustice' thing contributed towards the suckiness of the product, it didn't detract from it. I can feel the '...or we riot' bandwagon rumbling again and it fills me with absolute dread. If they want to push Bryan - fine. If it makes sense to push him - fine. But let's not get to a stage where we have organised 'hijacks' to make it happen again. Nor 'letscrapoveranythingnotbryanism' again "Is WWE wrong? ...No. No, the children are wrong."
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Dec 31, 2014 20:17:32 GMT -5
Sorry but the whole 'Bryan not being pushed is an OJ trial level of injustice' thing contributed towards the suckiness of the product, it didn't detract from it. I can feel the '...or we riot' bandwagon rumbling again and it fills me with absolute dread. If they want to push Bryan - fine. If it makes sense to push him - fine. But let's not get to a stage where we have organised 'hijacks' to make it happen again. If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2014 20:20:07 GMT -5
If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events? Like how Ambrose outsells Reigns in merch and is being jobbed out?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 31, 2014 20:20:44 GMT -5
If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events? If the market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales were all indicating that Batista vs Orton was the overwhelming way to go, then yes I might agree. Otherwise, the most direct way for WWE to gauge feedback is through live events. The people who pay to actually watch the product live, usually while wearing shitloads of Daniel Bryan t-shirts, chanting yes, and carrying pro-Daniel Bryan signs.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Dec 31, 2014 20:23:30 GMT -5
The live event attendance would have you believe Cena is hated. The reality is he is their biggest numbers mover since Austin. Maybe live event reaction isn't the whole story? Maybe?
The guy has cut a promo so far and already they're ignoring the fans if he doesn't win the rumble then the title at Mania. it's a tad suffocating
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Dec 31, 2014 20:23:36 GMT -5
If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events? I must have imagined all those moments in sports and entertainment where Daniel's YES! chant was used in non wrestling events. We get it, you hate Bryan. that's perfectly OK. But saying stuff like this with NO facts backing it makes you look foolish...and that's as polite as i can be about that.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Dec 31, 2014 20:24:00 GMT -5
The Bryan-Lesnar angle makes a lot of sense. Let's not forget he never lost the title. He had to forfeit it due to an injury. It would be a great selling point regarding the underdog vs. beast angle. Easily the two biggest stories of Wrestlemania last year going toe-to-toe this year would be a smart move.
So naturally, the WWE will go with Reigns in the main event slot and Bryan draws Sheamus.
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Dec 31, 2014 20:25:43 GMT -5
The Bryan-Lesnar angle makes a lot of sense. Let's not forget he never lost the title. He had to forfeit it due to an injury. It would be a great selling point regarding the underdog vs. beast angle. Easily the two biggest stories of Wrestlemania last year going toe-to-toe this year would be a smart move. So naturally, the WWE will go with Reigns in the main event slot and Bryan draws Sheamus. When life gives you too many limes, You fight Sheamus.
|
|
|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Dec 31, 2014 20:25:47 GMT -5
If WWE actually listened to the "WWE Universe" they beat people over the heads with, hijacking wouldn't be necessary Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events? What do you mean by "feedback by commercial partners?" Why would they even care who is the champion? As long as WWE is doing good business and they aren't having anything too risky on their shows, the cookie monster could be champion. The reaction from live crowds IS the market research. Ratings aren't a good indicator. No one on the active roster is a ratings draw. Same goes for PPV buyrates. Not Bryan, not Roman, not even John Cena. So, there's no honest way to use that as an indicator. Merch sales and crowd reactions are the only real ways to base a guy's drawing power on nowadays. Both of those things, BTW, are things that Bryan excels at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2014 20:26:41 GMT -5
Maybe market research, endorsements, feedback from commercial partners and merchandise sales are considered bigger indicators than people who attend live events? What do you mean by "feedback by commercial partners?" Why would they even care who is the champion? As long as WWE is doing good business and they aren't having anything too risky on their shows, the cookie monster could be champion. The reaction from live crowds IS the market research. Ratings aren't a good indicator. No one on the active roster is a ratings draw. Same goes for PPV buyrates. Not Bryan, not Roman, not even John Cena. So, there's no honest way to use that as an indicator. Merch sales and crowd reactions are the only real ways to base a guy's drawing power on nowadays. Both of those things, BTW, are things that Bryan excels at. And if you do want to bring ratings in on it, last year during Mania season Bryan's ratings were consistently the highest-drawing parts of Raw.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Dec 31, 2014 20:27:05 GMT -5
The fact of the matter is, we can only go by what information we have access to as fans. We don't get the inside stuff on market research or endorsements or commercial feedback, and we get merch sales updates like once in a blue moon. So the only things we have to go on consistently are TV ratings (which are a crapshoot more often than not), Network subscriptions/PPV buyrates, range of merchandise (because if there's a lot of supply, usually that means there's a lot of demand) and live crowd reactions. And the latter is overwhelmingly in favour of Bryan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2014 20:30:29 GMT -5
John Cena is 37 years old. Daniel Bryan is 33 years old. Roman Reigns is 29 years old. What do you mean by "a lot" younger than Bryan? Bryan's also not the same age as Cena. He's 33, that's around the age most wrestlers are when they're in their prime. Not to speak for @graant, but, to me, it's mostly about wrestling years. Cena and Bryan both started wrestling in 1999. Reigns started in 2010. That's a decade's worth of wear-and-tear that both Cena and Bryan have that Reigns doesn't. You know how quite often someone will start a thread on here asking how much longer Cena has left? The answer is likely, "About as long as Daniel Bryan." Roman Reigns, on the other hand? The WWE has plenty of time to make money with him (so long as nothing unexpected happens, like Reigns suffering a career-ending injury or leaving the company a la Rock). The difference is that Bryan hasn't been in the spotlight of the main audience as long as Cena and sure there's wear and tear, the main issue with the company isn't about how much damage the guys have on their bodies, it's about how they can contribute to the product and future plans. Sure, it should be about how much damage the guys have but it's not about that anymore especially considering the fact that most of the roster's already wrestling with injuries anyway and they don't give a damn. Punk's podcast proved it. As long as they can go in the ring that's all the company cares about. Bryan for example has been sitting out a great while recovering so that's a plus for him compared to Cena. Cena's been going full speed most of the time. Beyond that physically Bryan's younger as well. Overall it doesn't matter to the company. But yeah, Bryan is not the same age as Cena. Sure Reigns is younger but he's not the same age as Cena. Given Bryan's only 33, I say he can go at least 5-7 more years if he changes his style up a little which he'll surely do. It's not near the same as someone like Edge. Triple H was the same age as Bryan when he had his quad injury and we saw how long he could go. Edge was a little bit younger. Cena on the other hand? No, that guy will be retiring before Bryan. Why? He's "the guy" right now and he's been going full speed since 05, doesn't use all the time given to him to recover and he's obsessed with this. Bryan loves to wrestle but he's not going full speed like Cena because he isn't "the guy." That's just how it is.
|
|