Putting Someone Over: Or, Why 99% of You Are Fucking Morons

[dukes07]

Originally Posted by Dr.

It is funny, because if you were giving a better performance, it could be said that he's putting you over.



Actually he introduced Zeus and went on to main event SummerSlam and a special "No Holds Barred: The Match/The Movie" PPV. And of course the focus was Hogan. Give us a break.



Sheamus, Punk, Ziggles, Daniel Bryan, Ryback... the new stars thing was an issue a few years back, not so much today.



It's been said a thousand times- the wrestling business is cyclical. The bubble builds up, then bursts, then builds up again. You don't just replace a Hogan, Austin, or Cena. If it were so easy, I'm sure they'd be doing it. But hey, I'm starting to think you just like to argue for fun, so I'm gonna have to stop doing this song and dance with ya for a while bud.

I do like to argue. But I don't like Cena. That part is correct. I do see why they push them though: He makes money. But I also think they need to build better for the future. You have to take chances. I have never said Cena needs to be a jobber. But he could be used more effectively.

As for the cyclical part: It has been down for a long time. Monopolies don't work. WCW fans left for obvious reasons. More options on TV and the Internet. NFL got even bigger and there is MMA, plus wrestling just began to stagnate.

As for Savage: I forgot about Zeus. I was thinking of Dusty Rhodes. I got way ahead of myself. But Savage did indeed live in the shadow of Hogan according to many pundits. I would argue that Hogan held him back more often than not.

Ultimately in order to help get over you do need to win. But yes, some of the great feuds don't always involved trading wins etc. Sometimes they are dominated. However, one reason the nWo got so old was because they kept winning and WCW to many was looked on as a joke. They were not competitive. The fans knew that the nWo would win. Sure they were making money hand over fist but WCW did not adapt in time. They struggled once the nWo disbanded to recapture that magic and could not.

[klunderbunker]

Gah learn how to quote stuff.

Originally Posted by dukes07

So if Ziggler has been getting his ass kicked for the last year and a half then why give him the case?

Because the MITB case is believed to be an easy way to get people to forget everything that happened before, which doesn't work.

Everything is multi-causal: You need talent, which Ziggler has and he has some charisma and he needs to be booked strong.

He's a triple crown winner that beat Cena at the last PPV. That's pretty freaking strong.

Give him that breakthrough win,

Check.

and follow up on it.

Check.

I would have liked to see a clean victory, nothing wrong with that.

Nope, which is why he got one already.

If he beat Cena cleanly it would not hurt Cena.

It would hurt Ziggler though, as it would be wasted coming into Mania season.

So with Ziggler already a punching bag as you say, then this feud was just one in many that ended with Ziggler losing, so it is ultimately going to do nothing for him.

Yep. It's almost like it's hard to make up for years of losing and having him go over Cena hasn't helped him much. You know, other than all those other reasons I gave you already.

As for having the title at WM. It is the WCW title that WWE pretty much treats as a second rate title for the most part. So if has it then so what? He faces an Orton or a Sheamus or an ADR.

You mean rather than having Sheamus vs. Orton which they're clearly building towards? Instead of that we should have Ziggler vs. Sheamus, as in a match that happend TEN TIMES last year on TV and PPV alone with Ziggler going 0-10? THAT'S what you want headlining Mania? Or Orton who he faced six times on PPV? Ziggler has no business being in that spot other than because he won a stupid case that they have no idea what to do with.

Ziggler did win at TLC but the follow up was piss poor. Even the Observer agrees with that.

And if Dave Meltzer says it you KNOW it's true. Give me a break.

The crowd at the PPV was also heavily behind Ziggler, so he is over in many places and has a lot of potential.

Yes, the smarkiest of smark towns cheered Ziggler. If that's what you're basing this on, you're a bigger schmuck than I thought.

Not all heels have to be cowards. The beauty is in the chase. Some play the cowardly role to perfection and there are bad-ass heels throughout history. I just postulated that I would like a strongly booked heel besides Punk. You don't like that, so they have to be a face.

No, actually when heels win clean, they usually become faces. If they don't cheat, what makes them heels? See also: CM Punk.

The funny thing is: I am not that big of a fan of Ziggler. He is fun to watch, nothing more. But you keep mentioning that I am bashing Cena as you go after Ziggler and say Ziggler beating Cena or getting booked strongly would be stupid as the fans know about all the past losses. But Vince and others here believe that wins and losses don't matter. So if wins don't matter and the WWE banks on the fans not knowing that then why would booking Ziggler strong be considered stupid? Wrestling fans are supposed to have short term memory only. What is stupid booking is having Cena no sell everything and win all the time. No one in WWE is a threat to him. They have to bring in outside guys such as the Rock.

Translation: I hate Cena, I don't want to say I hate Cena because it makes me look bad, and Vince said something and I'm going to go with it because it's easier than thinking for myself.

Ziggler is booked strong. Cena is booked stronger because he should be. That's what this whole thing boils down to.

I am not sure what crowd you are listening to, but they seem to be heavily pro-Ziggler when he faces Cena. But it seems that you see things through a different pro-Cena lens and that is fine. And the matches are competitive? No the last two weeks were not. I think you need to get your eyes and ears checked.

I see things through a Pro-Cena lens because he's the best in the world and one of the biggest draws of all time. the fact that you honestly think Cena was squashing Ziggler the last two weeks proves that you really aren't that intelligent.

[dukes07]

Originally Posted by klunderbunker

Gah learn how to quote stuff.



Because the MITB case is believed to be an easy way to get people to forget everything that happened before, which doesn't work.



He's a triple crown winner that beat Cena at the last PPV. That's pretty freaking strong.



Check.



Check.



Nope, which is why he got one already.



It would hurt Ziggler though, as it would be wasted coming into Mania season.


Yep. It's almost like it's hard to make up for years of losing and having him go over Cena hasn't helped him much. You know, other than all those other reasons I gave you already.



You mean rather than having Sheamus vs. Orton which they're clearly building towards? Instead of that we should have Ziggler vs. Sheamus, as in a match that happend TEN TIMES last year on TV and PPV alone with Ziggler going 0-10? THAT'S what you want headlining Mania? Or Orton who he faced six times on PPV? Ziggler has no business being in that spot other than because he won a stupid case that they have no idea what to do with.



And if Dave Meltzer says it you KNOW it's true. Give me a break.



Yes, the smarkiest of smark towns cheered Ziggler. If that's what you're basing this on, you're a bigger schmuck than I thought.



No, actually when heels win clean, they usually become faces. If they don't cheat, what makes them heels? See also: CM Punk.


Translation: I hate Cena, I don't want to say I hate Cena because it makes me look bad, and Vince said something and I'm going to go with it because it's easier than thinking for myself.

Ziggler is booked strong. Cena is booked stronger because he should be. That's what this whole thing boils down to.



I see things through a Pro-Cena lens because he's the best in the world and one of the biggest draws of all time. the fact that you honestly think Cena was squashing Ziggler the last two weeks proves that you really aren't that intelligent.

I have said over and over that I dislike Cena. I used Meltzer as an example that not everyone agrees with your opinion. Because I don't, now I am somehow less intelligent. Jesus, get off your fucking high horse. Though I will say that I have no idea how to break down quotes....So mayhap I am not very intelligent.

Hmmm, kind of funny that when I watched their cage match I heard the crowd explode when Ziggler nearly climbed out.

It makes you a schmuck because you cannot possibly fathom that there is someone out there who does not like Cena. You invalidate my opinion because I am anti-Cena. But somehow your pro-Cena opinion is fucking gospel. Jesus Christ, that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Essentially if Cena raped a nun you would be a character witness by saying the nun was not over with the six year old pro-Cena crowd.

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

Sweet Jesus.

[klunderbunker]

Originally Posted by dukes07

I have said over and over that I dislike Cena. I used Meltzer as an example that not everyone agrees with your opinion. Because I don't, now I am somehow less intelligent. Jesus, get off your fucking high horse. Though I will say that I have no idea how to break down quotes....So mayhap I am not very intelligent.

Hmmm, kind of funny that when I watched their cage match I heard the crowd explode when Ziggler nearly climbed out.

It makes you a schmuck because you cannot possibly fathom that there is someone out there who does not like Cena. You invalidate my opinion because I am anti-Cena. But somehow your pro-Cena opinion is fucking gospel. Jesus Christ, that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Essentially if Cena raped a nun you would be a character witness by saying the nun was not over with the six year old pro-Cena crowd.

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

Sweet Jesus.

1. I am indeed more intelligent than you. Trust me.

2. This

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

sums up the whole thing better than anything else I can say.

3. If John Cena raped a nun, I can guarantee it would draw a bigger crowd than whatever Ziggler was doing that day.

To keep this on topic, the point of this thread was to say that Cena needs to be beaten to put someone over. That's already happened, but apparently that isn't enough for some standards. Now they want Cena to be pinned clean, which isn't going to make Ziggler a bigger star, because he's pretty much established as what he is now. The solution allegedly is to make him world champion, which won't happen anytime soon.

At the end of the day, what it boils down to is Ziggler simply isn't as good as he's made out to be. He's incredibly athletic, but at the end of the day he doesn't have what it takes to be a top guy. If he did, don't you think they would have pulled the trigger on him by now? A single win over someone doesn't change much anymore, even if it's the biggest star in the world like John Cena. You know, the guy that is so far and away bigger than anyone else in WWE that they had to bring in Brock Lesnar and the Rock to give him a challenge.

[dukes07]

Originally Posted by klunderbunker

1. I am indeed more intelligent than you. Trust me.

2. This



sums up the whole thing better than anything else I can say.

3. If John Cena raped a nun, I can guarantee it would draw a bigger crowd than whatever Ziggler was doing that day.

To keep this on topic, the point of this thread was to say that Cena needs to be beaten to put someone over. That's already happened, but apparently that isn't enough for some standards. Now they want Cena to be pinned clean, which isn't going to make Ziggler a bigger star, because he's pretty much established as what he is now. The solution allegedly is to make him world champion, which won't happen anytime soon.

At the end of the day, what it boils down to is Ziggler simply isn't as good as he's made out to be. He's incredibly athletic, but at the end of the day he doesn't have what it takes to be a top guy. If he did, don't you think they would have pulled the trigger on him by now? A single win over someone doesn't change much anymore, even if it's the biggest star in the world like John Cena. You know, the guy that is so far and away bigger than anyone else in WWE that they had to bring in Brock Lesnar and the Rock to give him a challenge.

You are not going to whip out your dick and try to compare size now are you?

I mean we could discuss the merits of Hellenistic influence on the Middle East or the historical arc pertaining to Russia's mistrust of the West while schizophrenically looking towards it for affirmation. But I am not intelligent. I mean I have seen the pro-Cena crowd in person. They are typically in elementary school or they have missing teeth, probably from Meth, and drive Trans-Am's with pictures of Tawney Kitaen on the dash. They usually bring their own White Lightening to the arena and for some reason tell others that the sure have a purdy mouth. Ned Beatty must get scared whenever Cena is in town.

Anyway, I will say that it has been really interesting. Enjoy watching the same shit over and over with the same predictable outcomes. Enjoy watching other wrestlers make Cena look halfway decent in the ring. Just drink the Fla-Vor-Aid like they did in Jonestown. Enjoy the poop and pee jokes and the same I have to take a shit look on his face. I mean they would keep him champ if they weren't worried about what few adults still watch WWE from fleeing. So I guess their confidence must not be high if they know that it would be difficult to get the over nine crowd into the arena. Good times. Meanwhile, I will watch cheer for guys who actually know how to wrestle and don't get shoved up our asses without the courtesy of reacharound.

[Echelon]

This thread is hilarious, but mostly thanks in part to Dukes07 - who has proven himself to be an even bigger tool than either ProWrestlingFan or The History. What you believe to be "good wrestling" is actually like watching coins spin down a giant hole. Pointless.

The best thing that Dolph Ziggler has done recently has been distancing himself from Vickie. She was holding him back, but not because she was terrible... it was because she was much better than he could ever hope to be.

The notion that Cena hasn't put over anyone is asinine. In short there's been... Edge, CM Punk, Bobby Lashley, Umaga, Great Khali, Sheamus, and now Dolph Ziggler... so quite a few.

Haiku was spot on - even if some up and comer suddenly gets a random pin off of someone in the big time, why should the fans care if they haven't been caring before?

[KJ]

Originally Posted by Echelon

Haiku was spot on - even if some up and comer suddenly gets a random pin off of someone in the big time, why should the fans care if they haven't been caring before?

This. Especially when John Cena has been made to look as probably most human supernatural force on Earth. As stupid as it sounds. To elaborate, the man has losses to likes of Edge, Batista, CM Punk, Sheamus, Randy Orton, an Dam, Shawn Michaels, Alberto Del Rio, The Miz, Triple H, Dolph Ziggler, Kane, Wade Barrett and probably more. All this as a top guy. No top figure in the WWE can boast such a list of losses, a good portion them clean, to so many names. Not Undertaker, not Stone Cold, not Hulk Hogan, not The Rock or Shawn Michaels. But obviously, Cena never puts anyone over. He just losses to them.

Cena ever had a flaw it's WWE's over-dependance of him. Such, lets be honest, when the closest people to match him have failed to measure up (Jeff Hardy, Randy Orton, CM Punk) it's no surprise WWE uses him so highly.

[dukes07]

Originally Posted by Echelon

This thread is hilarious, but mostly thanks in part to Dukes07 - who has proven himself to be an even bigger tool than either ProWrestlingFan or The History. What you believe to be "good wrestling" is actually like watching coins spin down a giant hole. Pointless.

The best thing that Dolph Ziggler has done recently has been distancing himself from Vickie. She was holding him back, but not because she was terrible... it was because she was much better than he could ever hope to be.

The notion that Cena hasn't put over anyone is asinine. In short there's been... Edge, CM Punk, Bobby Lashley, Umaga, Great Khali, Sheamus, and now Dolph Ziggler... so quite a few.

Haiku was spot on - even if some up and comer suddenly gets a random pin off of someone in the big time, why should the fans care if they haven't been caring before?

See, this is what I don't understand. I never said that the WWE should ever dump Cena or relegate him down to the midcard or do anything of the sort. He needs to be used more effectively. Instead donkey posteriors such as yourself, call me a tool, because I don't conform to the masses.

You seem to equate Cena losing a feud to Ziggler by flushing money down the drain. Then I hear not just from but others that wins and losses don't matter. But you have a guy who is going to be champ. He has the case. Then why the fuck have him lose more often than not? Where is the logic in that. They did the same thing with Daniel Bryan for the longest time.

The entire point is that if Ziggler won the feud and was not made to look foolish on RAW. Then that helps his cause. Fans are not going to turn away and stop buying Cena shirts if he lost.

As for putting guys over like. Take Sheamus, Cena brought up time and time again how lucky Sheamus was. Cena fell through a table on accident. Cena reminded him time and time again that Sheamus never beat him cleanly. That's fine, Sheamus never did but you also knew that Cena was going to win. In fact Sheamus' big push came after he turned face. After he won the Rumble and then after he won in 18 seconds. Thus telling the fans that he was indeed a man to be reckoned with. And it does not hurt that Trips was behind him all the way. Cena had nothing to do with it.

Also, his losses are all made as a way to protect him. Fine. He rarely loses convincingly. Okay, he is their top guy. When he does "lose" he is always going to get that win back. The fans know that Cena is going to. Cena reminds them that they won unfairly. Those guys he did lose too often don't get management behind them. And many don't deserve to. Someone mentioned Punk: It is hard to be the top guy when Vince books the other guy onto the marquee or they end your program prematurely. Or they fumble your heel turn with extraneous nonsense. If you are going to get the ball then you need to be able to run with it. Cena has his role and he can continue to make money for them but change is sometimes good.

A win, as in the case of Kidman or Ziggler means nothing if management does not get behind it and follow it up. It is meaningless then. But if they continue and book that person strong then fans will get behind them. The LA Clippers were perennial losers and fans stayed away in droves. But they started winning and the fans came back. Fans are not going to think that Ziggler is a piece of shit because he lost in the past. They are going to remember his current wins and his current push. There will be a few that do of course but in the long run it will help him and probably the company and he does not need to supplant Cena.

Look at Pittsburgh or the entire Rust Belt as an example: The area relied on one thing, steel. It had a monoeconomy where the entire edifice was built off of steel. Fuck high school because you had a job in a factory waiting for you. College? No thanks. Money is flowing in, keep spending etc. Then the jobs started drying up and the factories closing. 100000's of people moved out and moved on. It has taken decades for Pittsburgh to recover and many other towns and cities in the area have not. Why didn't they diversify then? Now, WWE has been getting better in giving guys a push but at the same time you also want to look towards your future by protecting your past. Ziggler is talented and over and is going to have the world title sooner rather than later, so it behooves WWE to get fully behind him and not have AJ help him win every time.

Some of you are young lads. Get out and experience the world. Time to break up with that high school girlfriend and taste different fruit. You will enjoy it.

[Echelon]

Originally Posted by dukes07

See, this is what I don't understand. I never said that the WWE should ever dump Cena or relegate him down to the midcard or do anything of the sort. He needs to be used more effectively.

So you believe that WWE should job their biggest star, who makes them the most money, needlessly without any sort of story [because random big clean wins by heels don't equate to a money making scheme - see Tensai.]

Instead donkey posteriors such as yourself, call me a tool, because I don't conform to the masses.

I called you a tool because you have no fucking clue what you are talking about; and it's hilarious because you act like your some scholar on the subject.

You seem to equate Cena losing a feud to Ziggler by flushing money down the drain.

It would be because people don't want to see Ziggler win; they want to see John Cena win - but take a beating in the process. The fans want to see Ziggler make it as hard for Cena to win as possible.

Then why the fuck have him lose more often than not? Where is the logic in that.

Clean wins against the top guy should only be used to enhance a face turn - like if Ryback where to pin Cena clean in the future. If a heel is going to win then it makes sense for them to play dirty... like Punk has done all year.

Pro Wrestling 101 right there.

They did the same thing with Daniel Bryan for the longest time.

And him getting over a mixture of luck and sheer brilliance. The fans created the Yes! chant, so WWE flipped it and had Bryan respond with the No! chant.

The entire point is that if Ziggler won the feud and was not made to look foolish on RAW. Then that helps his cause. Fans are not going to turn away and stop buying Cena shirts if he lost.

That's not how things work - heels are supposed to be foolish, either that or rash, if they weren't then it would defeat the whole purpose of having a bad guy.

As for putting guys over like. Take Sheamus, Cena brought up time and time again how lucky Sheamus was.

Classic face to heel psychology.

Cena fell through a table on accident. Cena reminded him time and time again that Sheamus never beat him cleanly.

More face to heel psychology. Cena was enticing Sheamus to defend the title by playing to his inner coward. And that's exactly what happened.

That's fine, Sheamus never did but you also knew that Cena was going to win.

The job of a heel isn't to win - it's to make the face's job of winning as hard as possible.

In fact Sheamus' big push came after he turned face.

Faces are pushed - not heels. Again, it's the heels job to make the face's job of winning as tough as possible.

What Cena did for Sheamus is that he took a new, green guy that the fans did care about and made him look like a legitimate threat. On the opposite side, it was obvious that Daniel Bryan was never a threat to Sheamus and the fans picked up on that immediately.

Also, his losses are all made as a way to protect him.

He rarely loses convincingly.

Okay, he is their top guy. When he does "lose" he is always going to get that win back.

Someone mentioned Punk: It is hard to be the top guy when Vince books the other guy onto the marquee or they end your program prematurely.

Punk has never been the top guy - the one time WWE tried pushing him as the top guy they realized that he wasn't anywhere close to Cena's level, let alone the Rock's level who would returning for some big matches.

Or they fumble your heel turn with extraneous nonsense.

The only way to fumble a heel turn is if the fans don't buy into it like they did with Randy Orton years ago. It's actually pretty hard to screw up a heel turn as heat is easy to get. Any Joe Shmo can do it.

If you are going to get the ball then you need to be able to run with it. Cena has his role and he can continue to make money for them but change is sometimes good.

Not if no one else can chase the title as good as you can - the change you talk about are more fresh heels in the title scene. And WWE is using Cena to build Dolph Ziggler.

A win, as in the case of Kidman or Ziggler means nothing if management does not get behind it and follow it up. It is meaningless then.

Congrats. You finally understand what all of us arguing against you have been trying to say from the beginning.

Some of you are young lads. Get out and experience the world. Time to break up with that high school girlfriend and taste different fruit. You will enjoy it.

[klunderbunker]

Originally Posted by Echelon

Haiku was spot on - even if some up and comer suddenly gets a random pin off of someone in the big time, why should the fans care if they haven't been caring before?

I've talked about this on my site before. If Austin had been given the title right after Mania 13, it would have worked. However, instead they gave him another year of seasoning and THEN gave him the belt. By that point he was ready to be champion and there was no turning back for him. A good example of how this worked in modern times is Miz. He worked his way up the card and started rubbing elbows with big names until he could give them challenges and then he started beating them. Since he had gotten so close before, the wins weren't shocking and could be accepted.

You have to build people up, not throw them out there and expect them to stand on their own.