wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 4, 2015 7:30:12 GMT -5
No, no, it's fine. I'm going to try and bow out here. This always happens in internet debates, where you encounter people that get such an over inflated sense of their own knowledge of what they are commenting on that is supposedly surpasses any knowledge, metrics, or a level of understanding about a business than a fan couldn't possibly have. This is why HHH cuts these sort of troll promos he's been doing this year. It's frankly obvious that they will have ways of assessing the potential and current performance of their talent that we won't have access to. So, so obvious. And just on your 'Cena isn't the issue' point...I know...he wasn't even the main thrust of my point there, at all. Knock it off with these sorts of comments. We are here to discuss, not attack each other. You do not come on here and bash other people. No one's claiming to be an expert here but they have the right to make comments free from condescending remarks. By saying that a fans knowledge wouldn't be as much as Regal's or Demott's isn't condescending though, or at least it shouldn't be taken that way. It's just fact. Of course we are here to discuss whether or not we like things in the show, how we react to certain characters and storylines etc. But I've never seen a section of any fan base have so many people that decide that someone isn't ready, from a worker perspective. That's not about enjoyment of character presentation, or even enjoyment of matches, that's saying, yeah, he's good, but he's not quite there in these areas yet, and I'm going to boo him until he is. Those are the people I'm taking issue with.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 7:37:08 GMT -5
Knock it off with these sorts of comments. We are here to discuss, not attack each other. You do not come on here and bash other people. No one's claiming to be an expert here but they have the right to make comments free from condescending remarks. By saying that a fans knowledge wouldn't be as much as Regal's or Demott's isn't condescending though, or at least it shouldn't be taken that way. It's just fact. Of course we are here to discuss whether or not we like things in the show, how we react to certain characters and storylines etc. But I've never seen a section of any fan base have so many people that decide that someone isn't ready, from a worker perspective. That's not about enjoyment of character presentation, or even enjoyment of matches, that's saying, yeah, he's good, but he's not quite there in these areas yet, and I'm going to boo him until he is. Those are the people I'm taking issue with. Yes it does seem reasonably disingenuous to claim that booing him is somehow 'tough love', like the Mark David Chapman defence of "I shot him so his next album would be better". I get that people have their favourites and that's been the case for time immemorial but this new thing of being willing to outright bury and derail anyone out of spite of their favourite not getting the spot they want him to does seem entirely new and like you I don't buy the justification for it and deep down I suspect they don't either. I wonder if it's a modern thing. Twitter now gives an insight into this. Fans of a certain type of group appealing to a certain demographic don't just support their favourite band, they actively engage in smear campaigns against those who belong to another. In my day, as my dad would say, I liked my band and you liked yours. I didn't have social networking to abuse yours. These days that tool exists. It seems it's not enough to be pro-something, there has to be a campaign against something else that's seen as its/their rivals or competitiors to whether it's Bieber, One Direction or whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2015 7:45:04 GMT -5
I'm curious to see how crowds over the next few weeks react to Reigns with Bryan back, might paint an interesting picture one way or the other. Although looking the crowds between now and the Rumble are pretty weak anyway - New Orleans might be interesting, but practically nobody gets a reaction in Corpus Christi and I'd assume Dallas is probably about the same.
Also, the, "Regal likes this guy, DeMott likes this guy, you're not a wrestler, you don't know!" thing... Okay. But I am a viewer, as is everyone else watching Raw, and when it comes right down to it the fanbase knows better than the people in charge because they're the ones who keep the company alive. If the audience for WWE were strictly people in the business then there would be no WWE.
And people booing those they just plain don't like is nothing new. Honky Tonk Man and Rocky Maivia come to mind.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 29,005
|
Post by Sephiroth on Jan 4, 2015 7:53:49 GMT -5
He's related to the Rock. He had a near two year run with one of the greatest wrestling stables of recent memory. He's likely going to be able to say he beat Brock Lesnar and became world champion. And seemingly every woman on earth wants to see him in a loincloth.
Yeah, he's got my sympy.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 8:03:09 GMT -5
Rock and Honky were booed because the crowd didn't like them. That's what has always happened in wrestling. They weren't booed because they were perceived to have taken the spot of someone the crowd do like.
"Boo you because you're not my favourite" is a new phenomenon. In the past there used to be many top baby faces who'd get pushed at different times of the year.
Of course I say his but it hasn't happened. I'm falling into the trap of believing the mind-trick that Reign's title run has not only already happened but already failed.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 4, 2015 10:32:39 GMT -5
I'm curious to see how crowds over the next few weeks react to Reigns with Bryan back, might paint an interesting picture one way or the other. Although looking the crowds between now and the Rumble are pretty weak anyway - New Orleans might be interesting, but practically nobody gets a reaction in Corpus Christi and I'd assume Dallas is probably about the same. Also, the, "Regal likes this guy, DeMott likes this guy, you're not a wrestler, you don't know!" thing... Okay. But I am a viewer, as is everyone else watching Raw, and when it comes right down to it the fanbase knows better than the people in charge because they're the ones who keep the company alive. If the audience for WWE were strictly people in the business then there would be no WWE. And people booing those they just plain don't like is nothing new. Honky Tonk Man and Rocky Maivia come to mind. I don't know how many times I can say this, but I'm not saying fans can't react to a character and know what they do or don't like. That is not what I'm talking about here. What I'm talking about is this being one of the first times I've ever seen of people saying 'yeah he's good, but he's not ready' and making comments on specific parts of his ability as a worker. It's not saying they don't like his character, or his move set or something like that, it's saying he's not ready because of his ability as a worker. That's who I'm taking issue with. A section of fans acting like they can objectively rate his talent, regardless of whether or not the character and presentation is good or not. You get it on sports forums, it would be like a coach clearly rating a player, and the player actually performing by a number of different metrics, but a section of fans claiming he is not ready...and they are right...just because.
|
|
wcc2
AC Slater
Posts: 159
|
Post by wcc2 on Jan 4, 2015 10:33:36 GMT -5
Rock and Honky were booed because the crowd didn't like them. That's what has always happened in wrestling. They weren't booed because they were perceived to have taken the spot of someone the crowd do like. "Boo you because you're not my favourite" is a new phenomenon. In the past there used to be many top baby faces who'd get pushed at different times of the year. Of course I say his but it hasn't happened. I'm falling into the trap of believing the mind-trick that Reign's title run has not only already happened but already failed. Indeed. This really is quite a new thing but as we say, it hasn't happened yet but everyone is talking like it has.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jan 4, 2015 11:33:34 GMT -5
WWE is in a pickle here, a more abstract one than last year with Batista. Let's face it, if the crowd crapped on Batista did it really matter? It was easy enough to turn him into a douchebag heel again, put him with Evolution again, etc. At the end of the day Batista is a far better and more versatile performer than Reigns. His "disastrous" comeback involved being in multiple MOTY contenders and putting over Bryan and The Shield.
Committing such an error with Reigns is far worse. He's over right now, but in more of a "Guy who should headline a B house show" sort of way than a "No doubt about it" world champion. They've built an issue with him and Rusev fairly well on TV, so have him end Rusev's streak at WM after steamrolling Big Show in Feb. That's a quality push that seems about right for him without seeming like a depush. It also builds some future anticipation for him to win the big one.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 13:06:15 GMT -5
You don't always have to be the top guy to get the title - sometimes the title can be used as the catalyst to push someone that extra mile over the top.
The risk involved in not giving him the belt are huge. If he wins the title and the crowd don't take to him at least they have established a new main event level talent, even if he needs to be a heel. If they hold fire for a year then there's a big risk of the Luger effect striking. Holding off a title win for so long that when the time comes where you want to do it nobody will care. How do you keep someone on hold for 15 months in today's environment, it's very hard.
For my money it's a case of take the risk now and hope for the best or you don't and you let it pass and hope that by chance he's popular as he as now next year, but you can't keep someone on the burn for so long the product the way it is today, much less earmark someone for the WM main event 15 months from now. If he doesn't get the title at Mania there's no way of knowing if the steam might evaporate from him. It's true that they may give him the title and it evaporates anyway - but there's zero risk.
Bryan will be over whatever happens, title or no title. This might be Reigns' only chance and it could either be brilliant or awful but there's little downside to trying.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 4, 2015 13:11:50 GMT -5
WWE is in a pickle here, a more abstract one than last year with Batista. Let's face it, if the crowd crapped on Batista did it really matter? It was easy enough to turn him into a douchebag heel again, put him with Evolution again, etc. At the end of the day Batista is a far better and more versatile performer than Reigns. His "disastrous" comeback involved being in multiple MOTY contenders and putting over Bryan and The Shield. Committing such an error with Reigns is far worse. He's over right now, but in more of a "Guy who should headline a B house show" sort of way than a "No doubt about it" world champion. They've built an issue with him and Rusev fairly well on TV, so have him end Rusev's streak at WM after steamrolling Big Show in Feb. That's a quality push that seems about right for him without seeming like a depush. It also builds some future anticipation for him to win the big one. I'd like to see him beat Rusev, but idk if I see them giving Reigns the U.S. Title because THAT might seem like a depush in their eyes.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 13:17:40 GMT -5
I'd rather feed Rusev to Ambrose. I don't think Rusev is much to write home about. Make him look strong and have him be a signpost along the way to getting to the main event. Almost what Big Show should have been for a few years had they not ruined him. I don't think Reigns will get much through beating him as he's either on or above that level now already anyway. Plus his size makes it less impressive. Ambrose on the other hand would get some rub out of beating guys like Rusev and Ryback
|
|
|
Post by King Boo on Jan 4, 2015 13:20:37 GMT -5
You don't always have to be the top guy to get the title - sometimes the title can be used as the catalyst to push someone that extra mile over the top. The risk involved in not giving him the belt are huge. If he wins the title and the crowd don't take to him at least they have established a new main event level talent, even if he needs to be a heel. If they hold fire for a year then there's a big risk of the Luger effect striking. Holding off a title win for so long that when the time comes where you want to do it nobody will care. How do you keep someone on hold for 15 months in today's environment, it's very hard. For my money it's a case of take the risk now and hope for the best or you don't and you let it pass and hope that by chance he's popular as he as now next year, but you can't keep someone on the burn for so long the product the way it is today, much less earmark someone for the WM main event 15 months from now. If he doesn't get the title at Mania there's no way of knowing if the steam might evaporate from him. It's true that they may give him the title and it evaporates anyway - but there's zero risk. Bryan will be over whatever happens, title or no title. This might be Reigns' only chance and it could either be brilliant or awful but there's little downside to trying. Couldn't a downside be that he's rejected in the spot and whatever momentum he did have is thwarted, putting him on the fast track to irrelevance? Then if they try again, he has a stigma attached to him and no one cares about whatever they do with him? That doesn't seem like such a little risk or downside to me.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 4, 2015 13:21:12 GMT -5
I'd rather feed Rusev to Ambrose. I don't think Rusev is much to write home about. Make him look strong and have him be a signpost along the way to getting to the main event. Almost what Big Show should have been for a few years had they not ruined him. I don't think Reigns will get much through beating him as he's either on or above that level now already anyway. Plus his size makes it less impressive. Ambrose on the other hand would get some rub out of beating guys like Rusev and Ryback Ambrose is above that level too. Ambrose was arguably the start of the U.S. Title being put in its current limbo.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 13:27:51 GMT -5
You don't always have to be the top guy to get the title - sometimes the title can be used as the catalyst to push someone that extra mile over the top. The risk involved in not giving him the belt are huge. If he wins the title and the crowd don't take to him at least they have established a new main event level talent, even if he needs to be a heel. If they hold fire for a year then there's a big risk of the Luger effect striking. Holding off a title win for so long that when the time comes where you want to do it nobody will care. How do you keep someone on hold for 15 months in today's environment, it's very hard. For my money it's a case of take the risk now and hope for the best or you don't and you let it pass and hope that by chance he's popular as he as now next year, but you can't keep someone on the burn for so long the product the way it is today, much less earmark someone for the WM main event 15 months from now. If he doesn't get the title at Mania there's no way of knowing if the steam might evaporate from him. It's true that they may give him the title and it evaporates anyway - but there's zero risk. Bryan will be over whatever happens, title or no title. This might be Reigns' only chance and it could either be brilliant or awful but there's little downside to trying. Couldn't a downside be that he's rejected in the spot and whatever momentum he did have is thwarted, putting him on the fast track to irrelevance? Then if they try again, he has a stigma attached to him and no one cares about whatever they do with him? That doesn't seem like such a little risk or downside to me. It would be a downside but it'd be savable. When fans see someone in the main event usually it sticks, at least for a while. Even if fans don't take to him he'll be very likely to enjoy a run for the rest of the year as someone else added to the main event pool. Quickly switch to Cena or Bryan and have Reigns as the top heel. If someone else wins the title at Mania - another face - that's really it in terms of the ME until they lose it. If you don't pull the trigger and he lingers and then fans tire of him and then by the time we get to SS the moment has gone and nobody is talking about him being the next world champ then you lose everything. Maybe giving him the title isn't no risk but I think even if it doesn't work out there's still likely to be something savable from it in that those who fans see as a main eventer (even if they boo him) is beefed up. IMO that's preferable to the vein hope that they can keep his momentum burning for a year, which is much more difficult. Especially as if it doesn't wrk you've Bryan and Cena to take over at no notice anyway. I'd rather feed Rusev to Ambrose. I don't think Rusev is much to write home about. Make him look strong and have him be a signpost along the way to getting to the main event. Almost what Big Show should have been for a few years had they not ruined him. I don't think Reigns will get much through beating him as he's either on or above that level now already anyway. Plus his size makes it less impressive. Ambrose on the other hand would get some rub out of beating guys like Rusev and Ryback Ambrose is above that level too. Ambrose was arguably the start of the U.S. Title being put in its current limbo. Yeah but Ambrose is smaller. Smaller guys look better beating up big guys than other big guys do. So he's probably beyond their level too but he can still get something from beating them that Reigns couldn't, at least to the same degree.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 4, 2015 13:30:40 GMT -5
^So you admit that smaller guys look better beating up bigger guys. By that same logic wouldn't Bryan be a better choice for the WWE World Heavyweight Title match with Lesnar instead of Reigns?
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 13:31:48 GMT -5
^So you admit that smaller guys look better beating up bigger guys. So shouldn't that be a good reason why Bryan should have the title match with Lesnar instead of Reigns? It'd also be an argument for Adam Rose doing it if you want to strip the point completely of its context, sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2015 13:32:52 GMT -5
^So you admit that smaller guys look better beating up bigger guys. So shouldn't that be a good reason why Bryan should have the title match with Lesnar instead of Reigns? It'd also be an argument for Adam Rose doing it if you want to strip the point completely of its context, sure. Adam Rose confirmed next WWE world champ. *submits to news sites*
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Jan 4, 2015 13:36:45 GMT -5
It'd also be an argument for Adam Rose doing it if you want to strip the point completely of its context, sure. Adam Rose confirmed next WWE world champ. *submits to news sites* This may or may not happen, their sources confirm.
|
|
|
Post by King Boo on Jan 4, 2015 13:37:27 GMT -5
Couldn't a downside be that he's rejected in the spot and whatever momentum he did have is thwarted, putting him on the fast track to irrelevance? Then if they try again, he has a stigma attached to him and no one cares about whatever they do with him? That doesn't seem like such a little risk or downside to me. It would be a downside but it'd be savable. When fans see someone in the main event usually it sticks, at least for a while. Even if fans don't take to him he'll be very likely to enjoy a run for the rest of the year as someone else added to the main event pool. Quickly switch to Cena or Bryan and have Reigns as the top heel. If someone else wins the title at Mania - another face - that's really it in terms of the ME until they lose it. If you don't pull the trigger and he lingers and then fans tire of him and then by the time we get to SS the moment has gone and nobody is talking about him being the next world champ then you lose everything. Maybe giving him the title isn't no risk but I think even if it doesn't work out there's still likely to be something savable from it in that those who fans see as a main eventer (even if they boo him) is beefed up. IMO that's preferable to the vein hope that they can keep his momentum burning for a year, which is much more difficult. Especially as if it doesn't wrk you've Bryan and Cena to take over at no notice anyway. Or, and this goes back to what I think is everyone's original point, slow down all the forward chugging motion to a speed that is on par with his skills so that no one tires of him anywhere (as the progress and exposure would match the level he's on) and then when you take that leap to the next phase, it's better received? I'm not trying to say the guy is totally hated on right now, but it's not like his reactions, especially as his matches go on, are blowing the roof off the place. What's the rush?
|
|
wildchair
Tommy Wiseau
A fan of the WWF/WWE since 1982
Posts: 77
|
Post by wildchair on Jan 4, 2015 14:14:37 GMT -5
Reigns will be a huge star in 5 years. Or possibly the next Umaga if the WWE does not allow the fans to create Reigns themselves and instead try to force him on us.
|
|