|
Post by angryfan on Jun 10, 2017 5:17:09 GMT -5
I honestly don't even know what the f*** he's saying. Anyone care to translate for me? He's basically saying that he'll give any potential young guy he's working with free reign to say/do what they want in an angle with him ("give me your best shot, but i'll give it back just as hard"), but not to blame him if the guy he's finished working with can't keep that momentum going and make themselves a main eventer waiting to happen because if they fail it's not on him. In a weird insulated way, I can agree with him. Is it fully his fault that no one really succeeds after feuding with him? Nah, it's booking, it's the creative team that says "ok, done with them working Cena, so what's next for Cena, and dump that guy in the midcard pool until we need him again". Problem is, when the feuds are Guy gets in Cena's face, Cena cuts dismissive promos that are pure heel 101 but treated like some humble babyface mantra, and if the opponent goes over Cena in a match the response is "oh, well that one doesn't count, not until...". The feud then continues until, even if the guy who is working Cena gets five wins in a row or something, with him being dismissed every time or told "oh yeah? Wait til next time, because...", at the end, Cena gets that "blow off" win, cuts a promo that amounts to, "Well, now that I beat you, I can say you're in my league, even if the times you won, I said it didn't count". All of this is matched with the commentary going with the "what a great man he is" stuff the entire feud. So...does HE bury them? Not entirely no. But if he's one of the few guys that has any control over promos, then maybe say, "Hey, listen, if I'm going to have them go over two or three times before I get my win back, then maybe in between I don't verbally emasculate them like I'm trying for heel heat, how about that?" But, that is one of his biggest consistent character traits, so for that, I do say he carries a good bit of blame.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 10, 2017 6:15:26 GMT -5
Sort of off-topic, but holy hell what is Cena's problem with Miz? He's buried both of their Mania programs hard now ("I made average look awesome" the first time, now this "No one cared until I pumped it up" which is just a flat-out lie) while putting all the blame on Miz. Professional rivalry perhaps? Over the years Miz has worked every bit as hard for the company doing PR work as Cena does, and has been the company's go-to guy when Cena's not available to do a PR appearance. People in Cena's position are often not above feeling threatened by others, and that is often why they politic to bury others who they perceive as a threat, regardless of how small the actual threat is.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,793
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jun 10, 2017 6:29:17 GMT -5
I do think Cena could have spared a few more losses in his feuds to help the larger narrative (mostly SummerSlam 2010 against The Nexus and WrestleMania 30 against Wyatt), but you couldn't have done too many because it would have lost all effect before too long. Look at how little it meant for Del Rio to beat Cena clean just months after Owens did it. People were into that US title invitational storyline due to the "the future goes through me" set-up. Then instead of a relatively young guy beating him and becoming that future we had a blast from the past that had no future in the company. That may not be all Cena's fault but when you build an entire angle around putting over young talent and then fail to deliver on it you can understand the perception. (It's arguable that Nexus falls under a similar category)
|
|
|
Post by Surfer Sandman on Jun 10, 2017 7:46:14 GMT -5
It is somewhat true. There were plenty of guys who faced Cena that I didn't give a shit about and most of those guys are either gone or on their way out.
I don't think feuding with Cena is the career-killer that some people think it is. If that's the case, then would guys like Danielson, CM Punk, AJ Styles or Kevin Owens still be around? They were already established in the indies/world and maybe that's why Cena feels that way about the WWE-raised talent he faced.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Free Moon-Down with Burger on Jun 10, 2017 7:51:39 GMT -5
Cena made Owens on the main roster. I don't care what anyone says about him ultimately losing the feud. He came in hot and feuded with and beat Cena.
Without the Cena feud, Owens would've been a decent but not exactly heated midcard NXT callup.
|
|
|
Post by abjordans on Jun 10, 2017 7:58:48 GMT -5
I think Cena is exactly right. He may not of done any favors for Sandow, Wyatt, and Barrett, but those guys kind of suck in my opinion. However, he did wonders for the WWE careers of Kevin Owens, AJ Styles, CM Punk, and Daniel Bryan. If you are good enough and hot enough, Cena will do business. I have never felt like Cena buries guys, I think that is bullshit. He doesn't lose to any bum they put up against him, but he doesn't steamroll every guy either. I'm all for protecting guys so that beating them seems like a big deal, but it almost always universally favors Cena every time. If you beat him, he is going to come back and beat you. When the narrative always plays out the exact same way, it doesn't provide anything for the talent. I've said for years if an upcoming talent has any chance to succeed in the long run, they need to stay away from Cena because he feeds on others' momentum to keep himself afloat. The way you should always book a feud is whoever the winner is has all momentum already, so your main priority is the next feud for the loser to keep them relevant. But not John Cena, he's a dead end for your career if you aren't a top guy already. The amount of money this company has wasted on keeping him the status quo while they had other acts that may have also been financially profitable is staggering. And you know what? I find it offensive when someone says that Cena "did wonders" for someone such as Bryan or Punk. That's ridiculous. He was smart enough to get involved so that it looked like he was doing the favor. Bryan was already made before Cena " put him over". Punk just happened to beat the one guy who was universally despised by the other side of the audience. Ryback wasn't mentioned, but again another guy who was perpetually sacrificed because Cena needed something to do. I guess JBL is a patron saint for "doing wonders" for Cena. Because the performer didn't go out of their way to get over themselves. Cena takes no chances with guys. The guys you mentioned putting "over" were guaranteed to not fail without him being involved, so long as the company themselves didn't bury them. Don't get me wrong, I loved the Punk feud, but Cena was still proven right in the end. I didn't care for the Bryan feud though, he was just weaseling himself into a feud with an already white hot babyface. It doesn't matter if you find it offensive, the Cena feud put Owens, Bryan, Punk, and AJ on a different level. Hell, I view those guys on another level. To me, in my opinion, the guys that beat Cena like that just solidifies them in a different way. I don't really know how to describe it other than saying it is the rub you get from beating the man. Ultimate Warrior was different because he beat Hogan. Those wins over those top guys that don't always lose mean something still. At least to me.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jun 10, 2017 8:25:06 GMT -5
I like Cena a lot but this is such a tone deaf comment to make.
He earned all his opportunities? Now, firstly, I think that the 'dues paying' stuff in we is bullshit. However, Cena was anointed after only a few years on the roster, at which point he was fed JBL, Big Show, Jericho, Christian, Triple H, Michaels, Benoit... These guys bumped all over the place to get him over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 8:38:43 GMT -5
You know, I wanna stay civil, but the fact that some users here view Cena as this blameless, holy creature who can do no wrong & that it's everyone else's fault they stagnated after feuding him makes me bloody sick.
As much as I hate Hogan, business was through the roof, and there was a large pastiche of talent to fill various roles. This was also during the Attitude Era. Cena does MOT and NEVER WILL have this defense; business has been average to pathetic during his time on top, and I attribute that to a combination of oversaturation & a refusal to build up new challengers aside from being lambs to the slaughter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 8:46:26 GMT -5
I do think Cena could have spared a few losses in his feuds (mostly SummerSlam 2010 against The Nexus and WrestleMania 30 against Wyatt) somewhere along the line, but you couldn't have done too many because it would have lost all effect before too long. Look at how little it meant for Del Rio to beat Cena clean just months after Owens did it. The Del Rio loss isn't a good example because, at the time, it DID mean something. He returns to a huge pop, wins the belt in under 10 minutes and is pretty much treated like a hero. And afterwards, they don't do anything with him except put him in a feud with Jack Swagger, a guy who had done less than nothing even before Cena's US open challenge began, in a feud that couldn't have been more bizarrely jingoistic if it had flashing neon signs saying "Bizarrely Jingoistic". I mean, if it didn't go a different direction, Bryan beating Cena would have meant little because that win was only potentially being used to prop up Orton for a rematch with Cena before Batista came back to the scene. Exactly. They pretty much undid the whole thing by having Cena wander off, while Del Rio got into this hideously godawful angle with Zeb Colter and then became a part of the Main Event Job Squad known as The League of Nations, before that feud with Kalisto which sucked. And, let's not beat around the bush; it's not like De Patron himself is a great talent, but momentum is key, and that doesn't just affect the people Cena buries, but it also affects the lucky few who actually get a victory over his ass. Beating Cena means nothing if A) Cena whines about how you didn't earn it even if you pin him 100 times clean as a sheet until he gets one win over you (at which point, you're "made") or B) nothing is followed through with it and you wind up becoming just another fall guy to the new John Cena in town.
|
|
pegasuswarrior
El Dandy
Three Time FAN Idol Champion
@PulpPictionary
Posts: 8,748
|
Post by pegasuswarrior on Jun 10, 2017 8:51:40 GMT -5
That reads kayfabe as all hell. Yeah, I agree. That's why I liked it. If real, I would've had same reaction as some others in that he just buried everyone he's supposedly refuting the argument against. But the work is in, so it's a small glimpse of what I wish wrestlers still did consistently and without exception. Look at all the genuine reactions. That's why kayfabe doesn't/didn't have to be killed.
|
|
WWEedy
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,320
|
Post by WWEedy on Jun 10, 2017 9:46:05 GMT -5
This is why I hate wrestling sometimes, people all over claiming Kayfabe is dead and yet as soon as a narritive needs fitted or a defence needs to be made here come the choruses of work. Cena has snuffed out many a rising star and just because talented workers got over regardless, that doesn't mean potential wasn't cut off at the knees before they could get there. This whole statement is insulting, it's insulting to guys we all supported and watched bust thier ass only for them to get mocked, have thier character assassinated and to be left on the post-Cena scrap heap. This isn't the first time he's spoke like this, it isn't some far fetched idea that this is how he thinks and feels and honestly? It stinks.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jun 10, 2017 10:07:04 GMT -5
This isn't me trying to be funny, this is more of an honest question. How many people did Hogan "make" during his glory days? What about Austin, how many folks did he "make"? Historically, the tippy top babyface has never "made" anybody in WWE. The issue is that they rode with Cena on top for too long and when they finally did try to appoint his successor, they made two awful f***ing choices (Sheamus and Roman Reigns). Get pissy at WWE, don't get pissy at Cena for doing his job. Good question, though I'd say with regards to Hogan and Austin it's a matter of the context of different eras. Hogan was on top when there wasn't a dire need to make new stars; Vince was getting top talent from the dying territories, so if a guy was going to come in, do a main event house show circuit with Hogan, then move on, it meant that just about everybody involved walked away happy and richer for it. With Austin it wasn't the same "these guys were already made in the territories" thing, but people in WWF were just thrilled at how much money Austin was bringing in, so again, why worry if he puts over enough guys? Beyond that, Austin's story focused on him going over the old guard first (supposed to have gone over Bret, Michaels, and eventually Taker), but sadly by the time he entered what could've been his "put the next guys over" phase his neck injury had just worn him down too much; I think it's easy to forget sometimes just how short Austin's run at the top of the wrestling world was. With Cena, it's been an unprecedented run at the top, and business hasn't exactly boomed under him, and the current situation is, unlike during Hogan's and Austin's runs, WWE supposedly wants to create a new slate of top stars internally. Just a different historical context that makes a full comparison tough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 10:10:53 GMT -5
The funny thing about all this is that he's already quite possibly the most generous top guy WWE have ever had, at least in terms of losing matches clean to other talents. Hogan only lost ONE TV singles match clean in his entire main event run from 1984 to 1993, to Warrior at WM6. Austin once he was established in 1997/1998 as the top babyface, not that many more after that... Three Stages Of Hell with Triple H at No Way Out 2001 and Rock at WM19 are about all that comes to mind. Cena on the other hand? Ambrose (on weekly TV, mind you), Styles, Del Rio, Owens, Lesnar, Orton, Bryan, Rock... The only difference here is those guys were almost unanimously beloved in their times, and that a lot of people haven't liked Cena for years for various reasons, be it his character or his wrestling ability or who he didn't lose to or because the top babyface isn't someone else or some combination of the above. I think I mentioned this in another thread recently... Many don't seem to mind dominant top babyface booking as an isolated concept, their only issues are who it is that gets it. Hogan and Austin were each the hottest act of their time, and pushing them took the company to new heights. Cena is not the same case. He was pushed hard for a decade, and business just stayed afloat. There was no reason to protect him as hard as they did. Exactly. This is the point that needs to be stressed. Cena is not the draw that Hogan, Austin, Rock, etc, were. Not even close, actually. There is a difference between being the most over and the most pushed. Cena is the latter. HHH is the latter. Reigns is the latter. It's going to be a never ending cycle as long as Vince keeps pushing the guys he wants to push in spite of what the fans and the numbers (ratings, attendance, etc) say. Cena did not have to be pushed the way he has for the last 12 years. Their fear of turning him heel because of merch sales is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. CM Punk cut one promo and suddenly became the top merch seller (I think) in 2011. A year later, he was a heel again because someone had to be fed to Rock so that he could drop the title to Cena. There are a small list of guys who have surpassed Cena,, and a lot of guys who have never been given the chance to despite getting better/more sustained crowd support. Maybe some of those guys would have failed, but when you cut their legs out from under them before they have the chance, it makes Cena's entire point ridiculous. The business has changed since the 80's and 90's. In the 80's, a heel feuding with Hogan was the push everyone wanted. The WWF protected the hell out of the mid card faces, so even if a heel went from feuding with Hogan to feuding with Jake Roberts, it wasn't really a huge downgrade. That was the business model at the time. With Austin, it was the Russo "swerve" booking era where everything happened at 100 mph, but again, Austin was making so much money, it was more prudent to keep him on top and have him lose the title based on screwy circumstances so he could fight to get it back. With Cena, the business has changed completely. It's night and day. The WWE could have easily listened to crowd reactions, pushed someone else in his spot (Punk, Bryan, Hardy, etc), and not lost any business because of it. They just decide not to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 10:14:29 GMT -5
His 'failures' at getting people over.
Barrett: Not on him (one foolish decision at summerslam aside) Barrett suffered from bad timing his whole career, pushed before he was ready, depushed when he was. Creatives muck up.
Sandow: Yes, his weakness without a character was exposed in TNA but we didn't know that at the time. I think a healthy Cena barely besting him would have been better, Taker/Jeff situation. Is that on Cena or Vince? We will never know, probably Vince.
Wyatt: Same as above, Bray should have won at WM30 and it would have given the feud legs allowing it to last until Cena finally puts Bray away at summerslam. As it was post mania few cared as Wyatt looked lame. Again we can't tell if thats on Cena though.
His first US title run during the first brand split though, he made all his challengers look like goobers. Odd given how Angle, Jericho and Big Show had gone above the call of duty to make Cena a star.
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,678
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Jun 10, 2017 10:29:15 GMT -5
His first US title run during the first brand split though, he made all his challengers look like goobers. Odd given how Angle, Jericho and Big Show had gone above the call of duty to make Cena a star. Yeah pulverized the Smackdown Midcard something fierce, but I would argue the US Open Challenge was even worse. I'm sure Cena saw it as these guys getting a lift by rubbing elbows with him. I saw it as "Cena kicks out of every finisher in the company and then wins clean". But all those up-and-comers who are now stalled in the midcard probably didn't want it as bad as Cena did back in 2004 when he ran down everyone on the roster and then beat them clean, often in non-competitive matches.
|
|
|
Post by Stone Cold Eleanor Shellstrop on Jun 10, 2017 12:49:56 GMT -5
Guys get over despite Cena, not because of him.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,375
|
Post by The Ichi on Jun 10, 2017 14:57:34 GMT -5
Big fan of Cena. He comes off like a douche here.
|
|
|
Post by häšhtå.gdālėÿ on Jun 10, 2017 15:10:39 GMT -5
His first US title run during the first brand split though, he made all his challengers look like goobers. Odd given how Angle, Jericho and Big Show had gone above the call of duty to make Cena a star. Yeah pulverized the Smackdown Midcard something fierce, but I would argue the US Open Challenge was even worse. I'm sure Cena saw it as these guys getting a lift by rubbing elbows with him. I saw it as "Cena kicks out of every finisher in the company and then wins clean". But all those up-and-comers who are now stalled in the midcard probably didn't want it as bad as Cena did back in 2004 when he ran down everyone on the roster and then beat them clean, often in non-competitive matches. Im glad other people saw the US Bullshit Challenge for what it was. I was so glad when Del Rio ended that nonsense of making every guy in the company look rly rly strong by simply hanging with Cena.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Jun 10, 2017 15:52:05 GMT -5
Just follow the Triple H playbook, John. Co-sign on the indy and international talent that the company brings in. Create a vanity promotion within WWE with Old Man Vince's money that is less about creating & grooming future stars for the main roster and more of building a kick ass toy collection. Before long, people will forgive you of your past burial sins and actually non ironically want you to run the company.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jun 10, 2017 15:55:34 GMT -5
Just follow the Triple H playbook, John. Co-sign on the indy and international talent that the company brings in. Create a vanity promotion within WWE with Old Man Vince's money that is less about creating & grooming future stars for the main roster and more of building a kick ass toy collection. Before long, people will forgive you of your past burial sins and actually non ironically want you to run the company. Sounds like something Gail Kim should do instead of Cena
|
|