|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 23, 2015 19:37:26 GMT -5
The issue I have with the "Bryan should main event Mania" crowd is that....*he did*. He went over HHH, then won a triple threat where every obstacle in the world was thrown at him. He was the top dog, the WWE champ. Then, Unfortunatly, he got hurt. In the meantime (while Bryan's career was in some legit doubt) they started pushing the next guy in line. Look, I don't love Reigns, but the backlash he's getting is absurd. So because Bryan got the main event last year, he no long is eligible? I don't get this train of thought at all. They started pushing Roman because they liked him, he was over and they needed a face with Bryan out and possibly never returning I get that but why should that stop Bryan fans from cheering for him if he is their favorite and wanting Bryan to main event again after returning? They didn't shove Austin to the side in 99 because he had his moment in 98. Cena had 21, 22, 23 suffered a major injury, then returned to main event 24. They went back to them after massive injures, why not do it with Bryan? He lost his spot to injury and is done? I have never seen this attitude before now but now it is so pervasive and I see it holding no water whatsoever. WWE's business went from up shit creak without a paddle to winning by a large margin while Austin was on top. WWE's business hasn't changed at all with Bryan's rise to the main event. That's not to say that he shouldn't be pushed, but with WWE trying to find the guy they have the most trust in to be "the guy" and there's a lot of candidates, they at times have to make choices. They feel that Reigns would most benefit from beating Lesnar and they want to strike while he was still relatively high on the card. Like people say he should wait a year, but considering that Reigns main evented 3 straight pay-per-views in 2014 and was the co-main at Extreme Rules and SummerSlam, having him go down to feud with like Bad News Barrett and The Miz isn't gonna help the guy at all. People can want Bryan and not want Reigns all they want, but I still feel that some people are making it a bigger deal than it has to be. It's not me defending everything WWE does because I was pretty bored of the product too in the Fall months. I like Reigns, a lot of other people do as well, and I want to see him face Lesnar. I don't need to give a million reasons about business and stock prices and ratings and Network subscriptions and the concept of "Deserving and ready" to justify it one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Feb 23, 2015 19:46:52 GMT -5
So because Bryan got the main event last year, he no long is eligible? I don't get this train of thought at all. They started pushing Roman because they liked him, he was over and they needed a face with Bryan out and possibly never returning I get that but why should that stop Bryan fans from cheering for him if he is their favorite and wanting Bryan to main event again after returning? They didn't shove Austin to the side in 99 because he had his moment in 98. Cena had 21, 22, 23 suffered a major injury, then returned to main event 24. They went back to them after massive injures, why not do it with Bryan? He lost his spot to injury and is done? I have never seen this attitude before now but now it is so pervasive and I see it holding no water whatsoever. WWE's business went from up shit creak without a paddle to winning by a large margin while Austin was on top. WWE's business hasn't changed at all with Bryan's rise to the main event. That's not to say that he shouldn't be pushed, but with WWE trying to find the guy they have the most trust in to be "the guy" and there's a lot of candidates, they at times have to make choices. They feel that Reigns would most benefit from beating Lesnar and they want to strike while he was still relatively high on the card. Like people say he should wait a year, but considering that Reigns main evented 3 straight pay-per-views in 2014 and was the co-main at Extreme Rules and SummerSlam, having him go down to feud with like Bad News Barrett and The Miz isn't gonna help the guy at all. People can want Bryan and not want Reigns all they want, but I still feel that some people are making it a bigger deal than it has to be. It's not me defending everything WWE does because I was pretty bored of the product too in the Fall months. I like Reigns, a lot of other people do as well, and I want to see him face Lesnar. I don't need to give a million reasons about business and stock prices and ratings and Network subscriptions and the concept of "Deserving and ready" to justify it one way or the other. Here is the problem with this line of thinking, I am absolutely fine with Roman getting the shot. I am not fine with people making up excuses like "Bryan had his shot" or "Bryan was injured" or saying Bryan had a fair shot when WWE wasn't behind him until March and he got injured in late-April or early May. Stop with the "Roman cannot wrestle" or "It is all nepotism" or whatever else. That is where the issue comes in to me. If you don't want Bryan, just say it. If you don't want Reigns, just say it. Stop coming up with bullcrap excuses that have no basis in reality. This is where that WWE planted divide I talked about earlier comes in. None of these excuses are true but people are clinging to them to justify their fandom or preference. People love Bryan and don't want him thrown aside like he was after the Orton feud and as WWE wanted at Mania last year, that is fine. People love Roman and want to get behind him because he is a badass that is prettier than a shiny penny or what the hell ever and that is fine but coming up with false reasons to tell people why they are wrong is not.
|
|
wakko
Samurai Cop
Knows This
BAAAGH!!!!
Posts: 2,212
|
Post by wakko on Feb 23, 2015 19:47:19 GMT -5
You hit the nail on the head for me. I'm disappointed that the WWE doesn't realize the mega star they have in Bryan. Reigns is getting handed something he has not earned. Pretty much my thoughts. I have nothing against Reigns. He just needs more time. The guy has not been proven as a singles wrestler yet. And there are other more deserving guys that can hold that spot til Reigns IS ready. Just wish WWE wasn't in such a hurry to make Reigns the guy. It's hurting him more than helping him.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Feb 23, 2015 19:51:03 GMT -5
So because Bryan got the main event last year, he no long is eligible? I don't get this train of thought at all. They started pushing Roman because they liked him, he was over and they needed a face with Bryan out and possibly never returning I get that but why should that stop Bryan fans from cheering for him if he is their favorite and wanting Bryan to main event again after returning? They didn't shove Austin to the side in 99 because he had his moment in 98. Cena had 21, 22, 23 suffered a major injury, then returned to main event 24. They went back to them after massive injures, why not do it with Bryan? He lost his spot to injury and is done? I have never seen this attitude before now but now it is so pervasive and I see it holding no water whatsoever. WWE's business went from up shit creak without a paddle to winning by a large margin while Austin was on top. WWE's business hasn't changed at all with Bryan's rise to the main event. That's not to say that he shouldn't be pushed, but with WWE trying to find the guy they have the most trust in to be "the guy" and there's a lot of candidates, they at times have to make choices. They feel that Reigns would most benefit from beating Lesnar and they want to strike while he was still relatively high on the card. Like people say he should wait a year, but considering that Reigns main evented 3 straight pay-per-views in 2014 and was the co-main at Extreme Rules and SummerSlam, having him go down to feud with like Bad News Barrett and The Miz isn't gonna help the guy at all. People can want Bryan and not want Reigns all they want, but I still feel that some people are making it a bigger deal than it has to be. It's not me defending everything WWE does because I was pretty bored of the product too in the Fall months. I like Reigns, a lot of other people do as well, and I want to see him face Lesnar. I don't need to give a million reasons about business and stock prices and ratings and Network subscriptions and the concept of "Deserving and ready" to justify it one way or the other. How wouldn't it help him exactly? Serious question, I don't understand why working in the mid-card would be so harmful to him. This isn't the case of a main eventer being dropped down the card which we can probably argue does cause damage to these guys (see, Miz, Del Rio, Sheamus, Swagger, Ziggler, etc.). This is a guy who's still on an upward trajectory to the main event regardless of where he's standing on the card. Would it really be so bad to give him a Cena-like 2004 run where he own the IC or US title? It worked wonders for Cena, and only made him more over, even despite being in main event level matches against Kurt Angle, Undertaker, and Brock Lesnar a year prior. It would give him more time to develop a connection with the fans and improve his in ring game and promos, the things any main eventer without question needs. So what exactly hurts him by waiting? I'd really like to know. The only thing I can think of, is they really don't have a lot of confidence in him to get there on his own.
|
|
RIHT
Hank Scorpio
Wanted a title with "YOU'RE WELCOME!" Close enough.
Hey-yo.
Posts: 5,897
|
Post by RIHT on Feb 23, 2015 19:51:10 GMT -5
I think Daniel Bryan fans do come off as a bit entitled. Look, I get it, the guy didn't get a proper reign last year, and that sucks, but he *did* get THE moment at WrestleMania 30. Two in fact, both in beating Triple H who rarely loses, and in winning the triple threat. Do I think Bryan should be one of the top guys on the card? Yes. But after last year, there was no way for Bryan to top it this year, so why shouldn't someone else get a chance. Plus, I remember when this board was on-board with a Reigns push last year. Roman was booked differently last year. Also, how can fans of something be entitled? If, say, a t-shirt company decides to only make two sizes of shirts and people want more or different sizes, are they entitled and should they be ignored by the company? They might be able to go to a different brand, but realistically, wrestling fans really aren't.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 23, 2015 19:51:20 GMT -5
WWE's business went from up shit creak without a paddle to winning by a large margin while Austin was on top. WWE's business hasn't changed at all with Bryan's rise to the main event. That's not to say that he shouldn't be pushed, but with WWE trying to find the guy they have the most trust in to be "the guy" and there's a lot of candidates, they at times have to make choices. They feel that Reigns would most benefit from beating Lesnar and they want to strike while he was still relatively high on the card. Like people say he should wait a year, but considering that Reigns main evented 3 straight pay-per-views in 2014 and was the co-main at Extreme Rules and SummerSlam, having him go down to feud with like Bad News Barrett and The Miz isn't gonna help the guy at all. People can want Bryan and not want Reigns all they want, but I still feel that some people are making it a bigger deal than it has to be. It's not me defending everything WWE does because I was pretty bored of the product too in the Fall months. I like Reigns, a lot of other people do as well, and I want to see him face Lesnar. I don't need to give a million reasons about business and stock prices and ratings and Network subscriptions and the concept of "Deserving and ready" to justify it one way or the other. Here is the problem with this line of thinking, I am absolutely fine with Roman getting the shot. I am not fine with people making up excuses like "Bryan had his shot" or "Bryan was injured" or saying Bryan had a fair shot when WWE wasn't behind him until March and he got injured in late-April or early May. Stop with the "Roman cannot wrestle" or "It is all nepotism" or whatever else. That is where the issue comes in to me. If you don't want Bryan, just say it. If you don't want Reigns, just say it. Stop coming up with bullcrap excuses that have no basis in reality. This is where that WWE planted divide I talked about earlier comes in. None of these excuses are true but people are clinging to them to justify their fandom or preference. People love Bryan and don't want him thrown aside like he was after the Orton feud and as WWE wanted at Mania last year, that is fine. People love Roman and want to get behind him because he is a badass that is prettier than a shiny penny or what the hell ever and that is fine but coming up with false reasons to tell people why they are wrong is not. All I've wanted is for people to say "I don't like Roman" for the longest time and kept getting that "I like him but I think his career is better suited if" blah blah blah. I'm not of the "Bryan had his shot" group. I'm of the "I like Reigns better and don't like the concept of Bryan vs Lesnar" group. It's like I said in another thread, the majority of Pro/Anti arguments stem from "I like X so I'll find a reason to justify it" but if WWE addresses the "reasoning" (i.e. WWE doesn't push enough stars, WWE pushes Reigns) they're still not happy because that wasn't their REAL concern. WWE's business went from up shit creak without a paddle to winning by a large margin while Austin was on top. WWE's business hasn't changed at all with Bryan's rise to the main event. That's not to say that he shouldn't be pushed, but with WWE trying to find the guy they have the most trust in to be "the guy" and there's a lot of candidates, they at times have to make choices. They feel that Reigns would most benefit from beating Lesnar and they want to strike while he was still relatively high on the card. Like people say he should wait a year, but considering that Reigns main evented 3 straight pay-per-views in 2014 and was the co-main at Extreme Rules and SummerSlam, having him go down to feud with like Bad News Barrett and The Miz isn't gonna help the guy at all. People can want Bryan and not want Reigns all they want, but I still feel that some people are making it a bigger deal than it has to be. It's not me defending everything WWE does because I was pretty bored of the product too in the Fall months. I like Reigns, a lot of other people do as well, and I want to see him face Lesnar. I don't need to give a million reasons about business and stock prices and ratings and Network subscriptions and the concept of "Deserving and ready" to justify it one way or the other. How wouldn't it help him exactly? Serious question, I don't understand why working in the mid-card would be so harmful to him. This isn't the case of a main eventer being dropped down the card which we can probably argue does cause damage to these guys (see, Miz, Del Rio, Sheamus, Swagger, Ziggler, etc.). This is a guy who's still on an upward trajectory to the main event regardless of where he's standing on the card. Would it really be so bad to give him a Cena-like 2004 run where he own the IC or US title? It worked wonders for Cena, and only made him more over, even despite being in main event level matches against Kurt Angle, Undertaker, and Brock Lesnar a year prior. It would give him more time to develop a connection with the fans and improve his in ring game and promos, the things any main eventer without question needs. So what exactly hurts him by waiting? I'd really like to know. The only thing I can think of, is they really don't have a lot of confidence in him to get there on his own. It hurts him because he goes from being able to beat Triple H, Randy Orton, Batista, Rollins, etc. to dicking around with midcarders for no real reason. Look at what happened to Ryback when they started to cool back on him in 2012. He's not even remotely close to what he was in 2012, and he was a lot greener back then.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Feb 23, 2015 19:53:29 GMT -5
Here is the problem with this line of thinking, I am absolutely fine with Roman getting the shot. I am not fine with people making up excuses like "Bryan had his shot" or "Bryan was injured" or saying Bryan had a fair shot when WWE wasn't behind him until March and he got injured in late-April or early May. Stop with the "Roman cannot wrestle" or "It is all nepotism" or whatever else. That is where the issue comes in to me. If you don't want Bryan, just say it. If you don't want Reigns, just say it. Stop coming up with bullcrap excuses that have no basis in reality. This is where that WWE planted divide I talked about earlier comes in. None of these excuses are true but people are clinging to them to justify their fandom or preference. People love Bryan and don't want him thrown aside like he was after the Orton feud and as WWE wanted at Mania last year, that is fine. People love Roman and want to get behind him because he is a badass that is prettier than a shiny penny or what the hell ever and that is fine but coming up with false reasons to tell people why they are wrong is not. All I've wanted is for people to say "I don't like Roman" for the longest time and kept getting that "I like him but I think his career is better suited if" blah blah blah. I'm not of the "Bryan had his shot" group. I'm of the "I like Reigns better and don't like the concept of Bryan vs Lesnar" group. It's like I said in another thread, the majority of Pro/Anti arguments stem from "I like X so I'll find a reason to justify it" but if WWE addresses the "reasoning" (i.e. WWE doesn't push enough stars, WWE pushes Reigns) they're still not happy because that wasn't their REAL concern. How wouldn't it help him exactly? Serious question, I don't understand why working in the mid-card would be so harmful to him. This isn't the case of a main eventer being dropped down the card which we can probably argue does cause damage to these guys (see, Miz, Del Rio, Sheamus, Swagger, Ziggler, etc.). This is a guy who's still on an upward trajectory to the main event regardless of where he's standing on the card. Would it really be so bad to give him a Cena-like 2004 run where he own the IC or US title? It worked wonders for Cena, and only made him more over, even despite being in main event level matches against Kurt Angle, Undertaker, and Brock Lesnar a year prior. It would give him more time to develop a connection with the fans and improve his in ring game and promos, the things any main eventer without question needs. So what exactly hurts him by waiting? I'd really like to know. The only thing I can think of, is they really don't have a lot of confidence in him to get there on his own. It hurts him because he goes from being able to beat Triple H, Randy Orton, Batista, Rollins, etc. to dicking around with midcarders for no real reason. Look at what happened to Ryback when they started to cool back on him in 2012. He's not even remotely close to what he was in 2012, and he was a lot greener back then. What hurt Ryback is he became the ultimate choke artist who couldn't buy a win to save his life. I am not suggesting that at all for Reigns.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 23, 2015 19:53:33 GMT -5
"I like Roman better" is the new "I like Batista better". No doubt if Ryback won the Royal Rumble, there would be a "I like Ryback better" caucus. That would be fine, but please, don't bother trying to reel off lists of poor arguments trying to back it up as anything but personal preferences.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 23, 2015 19:55:26 GMT -5
"I like Roman better" is the new "I like Batista better". No doubt if Ryback won the Royal Rumble, there would be a "I like Ryback better" caucus. That would be fine, but please, don't bother trying to reel off lists of poor arguments trying to back it up as anything but personal preferences. Considering the Anti-Reigns people are doing the exact same thing, everyone would be better off sticking to the personal preference thing, but it's obvious that the closer we get to Mania this won't be the case.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Feb 23, 2015 19:57:58 GMT -5
It's exhaustion at the whole package. From the moment Reigns came back, he's the only non-Cena face who's allowed to matter. We're given a Rumble match expressly built to show the people who have fan support but not office support turned into chumps, and have been following that same trajectory since. Ambrose can't look good, Ziggler can't look good, and Bryan is stuck into a shitty angle with Reigns where they both come off as unlikeable because if they sabotage his reactions they can justify it even from that angle. Ziggler was given a big moment followed by nothing. Hell, even Rollins has taken a backseat as the de facto top heel while they build Kane and Big Show in lieu of better, fresher heels, who you just know are going to be Reigns's first opponents if he remains a face.
Roman Reigns isn't being rejected for not being Bryan. He's being rejected for being the only allowed to matter.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 23, 2015 19:58:27 GMT -5
"I like Roman better" is the new "I like Batista better". No doubt if Ryback won the Royal Rumble, there would be a "I like Ryback better" caucus. That would be fine, but please, don't bother trying to reel off lists of poor arguments trying to back it up as anything but personal preferences. Considering the Anti-Reigns people are doing the exact same thing, everyone would be better off sticking to the personal preference thing, but it's obvious that the closer we get to Mania this won't be the case. It's different with the anti-Reigns arguments, which tend to be based less on preference, and more on facts, such as Bryan being verifiably the more popular guy, and being marginalised for the second year in a row while management pushes their preferred hoss. It's also part of a wider context of WWE ignoring or sidelining guys who have obvious fan support such as Ambrose and Ziggler.
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Feb 23, 2015 20:04:54 GMT -5
Considering the Anti-Reigns people are doing the exact same thing, everyone would be better off sticking to the personal preference thing, but it's obvious that the closer we get to Mania this won't be the case. It's different with the anti-Reigns arguments, which tend to be based less on preference, and more on facts, such as Bryan being verifiably the more popular guy, and being marginalised for the second year in a row while management pushes their preferred hoss. It's also part of a wider context of WWE ignoring or sidelining guys who have obvious fan support such as Ambrose and Ziggler. It's not different at all. You like Bryan best and want him to main event. Saying "No it's different with us because our reasonings ARE true and yours aren't" is why I voted what I did in the first place. Just say that you like him better and get rid of the BS justification that shouldn't impact AT ALL what kind of wrestling matches you want to see.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Feb 23, 2015 20:09:45 GMT -5
It's different with the anti-Reigns arguments, which tend to be based less on preference, and more on facts, such as Bryan being verifiably the more popular guy, and being marginalised for the second year in a row while management pushes their preferred hoss. It's also part of a wider context of WWE ignoring or sidelining guys who have obvious fan support such as Ambrose and Ziggler. It's not different at all. You like Bryan best and want him to main event. Saying "No it's different with us because our reasonings ARE true and yours aren't" is why I voted what I did in the first place. Just say that you like him better and get rid of the BS justification that shouldn't impact AT ALL what kind of wrestling matches you want to see. It's very different. I want Reigns to main event too, but just not at this moment. He needs to develop and improve and will. It simply can't be done prematurely. I wanted Bryan to main event Wrestlemania now because the momentum was with him, as it was last year. They may as well take advantage of his popularity while it's there, but instead they choose not to. That's not a matter of personal preference, but observable truths. Had the positions been reversed, and momentum was with Reigns, I'd be defending him instead.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,524
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Feb 23, 2015 20:16:21 GMT -5
It's not entitlement to me, but the reverse. The most obnoxious thing to me is the 'pick and choose rationality' WWE's chosen narrative supporters. And it's not because they support it. It's the little cheap shot posts they make, the ones specifically crafted to piss the Bryan/whoever/Anti-WWE narrative avatar of the moment is. The ones that will use some false logic, and argue, occasionally slip in some really obnoxious 'woe is me, everyone is ganging up on me because i disagree' posts, and then rile people up. They'll come up with bullshit arguments, then twist people's rational responses around and around until they've blatantly baited people into calling them out. Finally, they hide behind the mods after it's all said and done, letting thread after thread be derailed and locked. And yet nothing gets done about them or their behavior. That's my problem with WWE (and FAN) right now. To be fair you could say the same thing both ways. There are some that will trash and ridicule anyone who takes the side of WWE. I'm taking the side of WWE and Reigns right now but it doesn't mean I'm mindlessly defending WWE, I just think they are making the right choice in this instance. I'll critisize WWE if I think they make a mistake and praise them if I like their choice. It goes both ways and painting this on only WWE supporters is simply one sided and untrue.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Feb 23, 2015 20:24:03 GMT -5
I'm irritated at WWE being deaf and blind to who the fans want, their "we know what's best for you" mentality is grating
- Ryback - Bryan* - Ziggler* - Ambrose*
Instead of "hey these guys are really over let's push em" it's "they're not who we hand picked, bury the f***ers"
*i' not a "Bryan or nothing" guy I'd've been happy with either of these winning, also for the record I like Reigns but he's not main event material yet. Honestly I think he would've been the perfect guy to defeat Rusev at Mania for the US title and have a decent run with it and hone his skills while he's there among some very talented people.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Feb 23, 2015 20:35:03 GMT -5
Daniel Bryan isn't the reason that too many of the fans are entitled. Whether you're on Roman Reigns's side or Daniel Bryan's side, everyone can agree- yes, Bryan is the best wrestler in the company right now, yes, he is the most popular star on the roster (without much of a mixed reaction), and YES, he deserves to be in the main event scene. Maybe that doesn't mean he's always the World Champion or fighting for the title, but he is a main eventer and deserves to be in the main event picture somewhere. None of those are a problem, none of them make you entitled to say it.
What makes a lot of fans entitled is it goes past "just" Daniel Bryan as a WWE World Heavyweight Champion and main eventer, where to a lot of fans of every type of fan, EVERY wrestler is the battleground. The really entitled fans are the ones who move the goalposts every time one of the guys they want- like Daniel Bryan- make their way to the top, to make it clear "We want EVERYONE we mark for as a main eventer and ONLY them as main eventers, and all the wrestlers we don't like to be jobbers to make those people the biggest and only stars." There's no one wrestler where fans will just accept "Okay, you're listening to us too. We'll give you Roman Reigns's push since you're clearly giving us Daniel Bryan as a main event-caliber talent, title or no title"- because instead, the second that Bryan was given to the fans, the fans started to say "Okay. You gave us Bryan...that's great. Now, we want Cesaro as a main eventer or we won't give you Roman Reigns as a star!", or "We'll give you Reigns if you give us Dolph Ziggler as a star!", or "We'll give you Reigns if you give us Dean Ambrose!", or any number of people until the fans get it.
Demanding Daniel Bryan as a main eventer does not make a fan entitled, demanding EVERYONE you want as main eventers- and ONLY them as main eventers- DOES.
|
|
Tony Schiavontay
Dennis Stamp
This is the greatest post in the history of this board!
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by Tony Schiavontay on Feb 23, 2015 20:37:59 GMT -5
The forced push for me and I say that as a Reigns fan. I just don't see him there yet.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Feb 23, 2015 20:38:05 GMT -5
It's not entitlement to me, but the reverse. The most obnoxious thing to me is the 'pick and choose rationality' WWE's chosen narrative supporters. And it's not because they support it. It's the little cheap shot posts they make, the ones specifically crafted to piss the Bryan/whoever/Anti-WWE narrative avatar of the moment is. The ones that will use some false logic, and argue, occasionally slip in some really obnoxious 'woe is me, everyone is ganging up on me because i disagree' posts, and then rile people up. They'll come up with bullshit arguments, then twist people's rational responses around and around until they've blatantly baited people into calling them out. Finally, they hide behind the mods after it's all said and done, letting thread after thread be derailed and locked. And yet nothing gets done about them or their behavior. That's my problem with WWE (and FAN) right now. To be fair you could say the same thing both ways. There are some that will trash and ridicule anyone who takes the side of WWE. I'm taking the side of WWE and Reigns right now but it doesn't mean I'm mindlessly defending WWE, I just think they are making the right choice in this instance. I'll critisize WWE if I think they make a mistake and praise them if I like their choice. It goes both ways and painting this on only WWE supporters is simply one sided and untrue. Oh, no doubt. But there's several posters on this board that do it consistently and no one can dispute that. I didn't just pull this complaint out of my ass.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,200
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Feb 23, 2015 20:40:00 GMT -5
There are some here who would defend anything WWE booked. Last year, there were guys arguing against a Bryan Rumble/Wrestlemania victory. They seem to be the same ones arguing against it this year. Begs the question, if these people were booking it, when exactly would his time come? Wrestlemania 32? 33? 40? It's just contrarianism. Daniel Bryan seems to attract it. Arguing against it is pointless. It's better to just sit back and enjoy people tying themselves in knots trying to justify a highly popular wrestler being marginalised in favour of WWE management's forced, shoehorned preferences, and booking clearly designed to put out fires. Or, in my case, the more that Bryan fans, just like when they were Punk fans in the past, just like when they were Benoit fans in the late 90s and early 2000s, the more self-righteous and snobbish they get, the more I want to see Vince spite the hell out of them and crush their hopes and dreams. Vince and Steph want fans hating fans? Fine, I can play that game. That seems to be what the internet is for anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Feb 23, 2015 20:46:36 GMT -5
There are some here who would defend anything WWE booked. Last year, there were guys arguing against a Bryan Rumble/Wrestlemania victory. They seem to be the same ones arguing against it this year. Begs the question, if these people were booking it, when exactly would his time come? Wrestlemania 32? 33? 40? It's just contrarianism. Daniel Bryan seems to attract it. Arguing against it is pointless. It's better to just sit back and enjoy people tying themselves in knots trying to justify a highly popular wrestler being marginalised in favour of WWE management's forced, shoehorned preferences, and booking clearly designed to put out fires. Or, in my case, the more that Bryan fans, just like when they were Punk fans in the past, just like when they were Benoit fans in the late 90s and early 2000s, the more self-righteous and snobbish they get, the more I want to see Vince spite the hell out of them and crush their hopes and dreams. Vince and Steph want fans hating fans? Fine, I can play that game. That seems to be what the internet is for anyway. Schadenfreude is really lame. Even if you don't agree with what they say, or how they say it, at the end of the day it's just pro wrestling. One of the dumbest forms of entertainment out there. Getting upset at other fans over it and being a dick about it back to them back isn't worth it.
|
|