Mr. LaBar, Mr. Isenberg, Id like to welcome you both to the WrestleZone Forums, having watched a number of Chair Shot Reality episodes, its good to be having a debate with the two of you.
That being said, in your most recent episode of the CSR, you responded to an email regarding Sheamus and saying that he should have a title run up to and around the 2011 Royal Rumble to build him up as an actual champion. Now granted while I agree we need to see better title lengths due to the credibility of the championship, but then given that even back in the days of the Attitude Era, Mankind and The Rock were three time champions in the space of three months, yet the long lasting effects are cemented by their rivalry. The problem that Sheamus has is what you rightly pointed out, he hasnt actually been booked as a clean wrestler, which is why the length of the title reign shouldnt matter but the integrity of the reign should be the important element.
To this date, Sheamus has only had two solid feuds that have lasted longer than a single pay per view cycle, and that is Triple H and Goldust. Since he got elevated to Raw, Sheamus has faced Randy Orton and John Cena in short feuds while having the odd encounter with Jericho and Edge, this has all happened within a year and Sheamus hasnt truly had a validated rivalry outside of his run with Hunter and Goldust. Lets look at the facts of his current matches between TLC 2009 and Night of Champions 2010:
TLC 2009: Defeated John Cena in a Tables Match, shocking the world at the sudden new champion who was only on ECW over a month prior.
Royal Rumble 2010: Defeated Randy Orton by disqualification, the match was about building the Legacy rival more than anything.
Elimination Chamber: Lost the WWE Championship through a pin by Triple H, this was to set up the rivalries going into Mania.
Wrestlemania 26: Lost to Triple H, a match I heavily criticised as feeling that Hunter should have put Sheamus over to give him some credibility, but my thoughts have changed over time, will come back to that.
Extreme Rules: Defeated Triple H, main element that puts him over is the fact that he took Triple H out.
Over the Limit: Not on the card until he takes out Cena at the end of the show.
Fatal 4 Way: Wins the WWE Championship by pinning Cena after a Nexus invasion, the Nexus story playing a priority.
Money in the Bank: Retains by escaping the cage due to Cena being held up by the Nexus, again Nexus storyline plays priority.
Summerslam 2010: Retained by getting himself disqualified after an awful match with Randy Orton, this was the match that made me change my mind about his match at Mania.
Night of Champions: Set to defend against Cena, Orton, Barrett, Edge and Jericho, the focus being on him in some part.
You can see the consistent problem going here, Sheamus hasnt been booked against a solid rival to the point that he cant even have the same feud with Cena that Batista had. Hes playing second fiddle to the other rivalries going on and this is hurting his credibility, which is why he doesnt need a solid run, he needs solid feuds. What was it that made Rock and Triple H in 2000 so great? They lasted for months. Cena/Orton? Same again. Undertaker/Edge? Rivalry lasted for over a year. Now while Sheamus is currently not getting clean victories, the only thing thats credible for him is that no matter what, John Cena cant beat him. Sheamus is truly being made into the rival for Cena that hes having a hard time going up against because he has the means to escape with the belt, and that is something that WWE needs to capitalise on. But unfortunately when it comes to escaping with the belt, this goes back to my initial problem, hes being booked as the Celtic Opportunist, an Irish version of Edge and instead of finishing business with one rival, another one comes up around the corner and yet Sheamus is made to look weak against them further.
It brings me back to my point about his match with Randy Orton at Summerslam, the problem they have is that they both have a slow method of wrestling, when Orton needs speed as a face, but just everything about the match was purely awful, Orton looked unstoppable and even kicked out of Sheamus finisher, what damage would have Orton suffered from losing to Sheamus? None. What came of it was that Sheamus, the supposed Celtic Warrior, is making himself lose in the same way that Edge would to keep the title, while it works for Edge because its his gimmick, this is Sheamus, whos meant to be an unstoppable monster applying the same tactics, which is what is wrong with how hes being booked. Lengths dont mean anything anymore as Sheamus is going to be keep being booked this way, it wont validate him as a champion if he keeps retaining through cheap tactics; he needs solid victories under his belt; he needs to beat Orton and Cena with a 1-2-3; he needs to hold his ground against them and keep it going for another month or two, not suddenly jump to the next guy who is going to be another opponent just for purpose sake.
In the end, Sheamus doesnt need a long title length to make him look like a solid credible champion, he needs to be booked this way in his matches and have solid feuds with other members of the roster, hes already a two time WWE Champion and his only solid feuds to his name are against Goldust on ECW and Triple H who should have put him over at Mania. If they want to make Sheamus credible, make him solid enough to show hes a threat, length doesnt do that, methods do. So I ask you Mr. LaBar and Mr. Isenberg, how can Sheamus being champion until the Royal Rumble help him when hes currently not being booked as a strong enough champion through the lack of a decent rivalry?
I look forward to your responses.
That being said, in your most recent episode of the CSR, you responded to an email regarding Sheamus and saying that he should have a title run up to and around the 2011 Royal Rumble to build him up as an actual champion. Now granted while I agree we need to see better title lengths due to the credibility of the championship, but then given that even back in the days of the Attitude Era, Mankind and The Rock were three time champions in the space of three months, yet the long lasting effects are cemented by their rivalry. The problem that Sheamus has is what you rightly pointed out, he hasnt actually been booked as a clean wrestler, which is why the length of the title reign shouldnt matter but the integrity of the reign should be the important element.
To this date, Sheamus has only had two solid feuds that have lasted longer than a single pay per view cycle, and that is Triple H and Goldust. Since he got elevated to Raw, Sheamus has faced Randy Orton and John Cena in short feuds while having the odd encounter with Jericho and Edge, this has all happened within a year and Sheamus hasnt truly had a validated rivalry outside of his run with Hunter and Goldust. Lets look at the facts of his current matches between TLC 2009 and Night of Champions 2010:
TLC 2009: Defeated John Cena in a Tables Match, shocking the world at the sudden new champion who was only on ECW over a month prior.
Royal Rumble 2010: Defeated Randy Orton by disqualification, the match was about building the Legacy rival more than anything.
Elimination Chamber: Lost the WWE Championship through a pin by Triple H, this was to set up the rivalries going into Mania.
Wrestlemania 26: Lost to Triple H, a match I heavily criticised as feeling that Hunter should have put Sheamus over to give him some credibility, but my thoughts have changed over time, will come back to that.
Extreme Rules: Defeated Triple H, main element that puts him over is the fact that he took Triple H out.
Over the Limit: Not on the card until he takes out Cena at the end of the show.
Fatal 4 Way: Wins the WWE Championship by pinning Cena after a Nexus invasion, the Nexus story playing a priority.
Money in the Bank: Retains by escaping the cage due to Cena being held up by the Nexus, again Nexus storyline plays priority.
Summerslam 2010: Retained by getting himself disqualified after an awful match with Randy Orton, this was the match that made me change my mind about his match at Mania.
Night of Champions: Set to defend against Cena, Orton, Barrett, Edge and Jericho, the focus being on him in some part.
You can see the consistent problem going here, Sheamus hasnt been booked against a solid rival to the point that he cant even have the same feud with Cena that Batista had. Hes playing second fiddle to the other rivalries going on and this is hurting his credibility, which is why he doesnt need a solid run, he needs solid feuds. What was it that made Rock and Triple H in 2000 so great? They lasted for months. Cena/Orton? Same again. Undertaker/Edge? Rivalry lasted for over a year. Now while Sheamus is currently not getting clean victories, the only thing thats credible for him is that no matter what, John Cena cant beat him. Sheamus is truly being made into the rival for Cena that hes having a hard time going up against because he has the means to escape with the belt, and that is something that WWE needs to capitalise on. But unfortunately when it comes to escaping with the belt, this goes back to my initial problem, hes being booked as the Celtic Opportunist, an Irish version of Edge and instead of finishing business with one rival, another one comes up around the corner and yet Sheamus is made to look weak against them further.
It brings me back to my point about his match with Randy Orton at Summerslam, the problem they have is that they both have a slow method of wrestling, when Orton needs speed as a face, but just everything about the match was purely awful, Orton looked unstoppable and even kicked out of Sheamus finisher, what damage would have Orton suffered from losing to Sheamus? None. What came of it was that Sheamus, the supposed Celtic Warrior, is making himself lose in the same way that Edge would to keep the title, while it works for Edge because its his gimmick, this is Sheamus, whos meant to be an unstoppable monster applying the same tactics, which is what is wrong with how hes being booked. Lengths dont mean anything anymore as Sheamus is going to be keep being booked this way, it wont validate him as a champion if he keeps retaining through cheap tactics; he needs solid victories under his belt; he needs to beat Orton and Cena with a 1-2-3; he needs to hold his ground against them and keep it going for another month or two, not suddenly jump to the next guy who is going to be another opponent just for purpose sake.
In the end, Sheamus doesnt need a long title length to make him look like a solid credible champion, he needs to be booked this way in his matches and have solid feuds with other members of the roster, hes already a two time WWE Champion and his only solid feuds to his name are against Goldust on ECW and Triple H who should have put him over at Mania. If they want to make Sheamus credible, make him solid enough to show hes a threat, length doesnt do that, methods do. So I ask you Mr. LaBar and Mr. Isenberg, how can Sheamus being champion until the Royal Rumble help him when hes currently not being booked as a strong enough champion through the lack of a decent rivalry?
I look forward to your responses.
