Not a popular subject: John Cena - who has he surpassed in Greatest of All Time list?

[mizowns]

Not a popular subject: John Cena surely has surpassed a lot of wrestlers.

But in my book he's not top top material, because he's a star in a PG Era, which is the worst era in wrestling. That doesn't make anyone great.

So what do you guys think?

Who has John Cena surpassed after 12 soon, 13 long years in WWE.

Which place is John Cena in a Greatest of All Time List?

Which wrestlers has he surpassed? And which hasn't he surpassed?

 

[Supreme Knowledge]

Not a popular subject: John Cena surely has surpassed a lot of wrestlers.

But in my book he's not top top material, because he's a star in a PG Era, which is the worst era in wrestling. That doesn't make anyone great.

So what do you guys think?

Who has John Cena surpassed after 12 soon, 13 long years in WWE.

Which place is John Cena in a Greatest of All Time List?

Which wrestlers has he surpassed? And which hasn't he surpassed?

Thats very hard and time consuming to say really. The one thing I can answer is despite peoples hate for Cena(Yes his character is beyond stale and hard to watch at times), he deserves his spot in the top. People have to realize the ATTITUDE era only lasted for a couple of years. Cena has been around since about 03 and has worked hard as hell to achieve what he did.

Considering the fact that accomplishments are hard to measure since they are fabricated, there is no denying Cenas work ethic, love for the business, effect on the business ect. If we are measuring Cena on success, like we do with other Major stars, then John Cena absolutely deserves his spot next to The Rock, Stone Cold, HUlk Hogan, Andre the Giant, Ric Flair, ect.

I'm no Cena or PG WWE mark by the way, my top 2 wrestlers are Bret Hart and Kurt Angle, I'm also a die hard Pro wrestling fan who enjoys technical wrestling and good art that a company like New Japan provides, but I also will tune in to WWE and TNA when the product is bearable to watch. PG Era or not, it takes a special individual to do what Cena has done, he deserves his top spot.

 

[Wald]

He hasn't, and won't, reach the heights of Hogan, Rock or Austin but he's easily on the same level as Bret Hart, Ric Flair, Macho Man, HBK, Sting, Undertaker etc. He'd be ahead of a few of them too if I could make a list.

He hasn't reached the level of the Big Three because he hasn't grown the business in the same way as those three did. He has held it steady and he might have been able to grow it more had the stars aligned better but as it stands I mark him a more popular Undertaker, more likeable Shawn Michaels and a more charismatic Bret Hart. Guys who were top talent, drew lots of money and were all at the top of the game for a while but who also didn't have the same spark as the Big Three of Hogan, Austin and Rock.

 

[Navi]

He hasn't, and won't, reach the heights of Hogan, Rock or Austin but he's easily on the same level as Bret Hart, Ric Flair, Macho Man, HBK, Sting, Undertaker etc. He'd be ahead of a few of them too if I could make a list.

He hasn't reached the level of the Big Three because he hasn't grown the business in the same way as those three did. He has held it steady and he might have been able to grow it more had the stars aligned better but as it stands I mark him a more popular Undertaker, more likeable Shawn Michaels and a more charismatic Bret Hart. Guys who were top talent, drew lots of money and were all at the top of the game for a while but who also didn't have the same spark as the Big Three of Hogan, Austin and Rock.

I have to agree with this. When you think of wrestling. WWE in particular, three names jump out at you, Hogan, Austin and the Rock. It almost a surety that no one will ever surpass them. But this is for fans that have been around awhile.

For some the PG Era might be the only one they know, so John Cena is already at the top of the list, and no one will ever surpass him. It really depends on who you speak too, how long they've been watching wrestling and how big of a fan they are.

There is one thing for sure though. No matter what era you're talking about, John Cena (stale or not, and I agree with that), has to be ranked up near the top of the class with the Flair and HBK's. He's carried this company for the last decade or so, and no other wrestler in the history of the WWE has been able to see they did that for that length of time. Love him or hate him, he always gets a reaction, and is still one of the best in the ring today.

 

[Mudlup50]

I'll say it's easier to list who he isn't greater than in our favorite scripted sport.


Hogan most likely won't ever be surpassed being as he brought a ton of new eyes to the screen, held the title for 4 years on his first run and then of course the NWO.

Stone Cold takes the number 2 spot being as he brought quite a few new eyes to the screen and kept the WWE from losing to WCW.

Number 3 could be either Rock or Cena. I know a lot of people are going to say, Rock deserves the spot over Cena but Rock was "top" guy for 4 years. In that time period he was one of 4 top guys. SCSA and Rock might have been the 2 big names but do they deserve all the credit? I'd say Cena inches this spot from Rock. Yes the Attitude Era is held in higher regards but Cena has been wrestling for 3 times the length of the AE.

My list for WWE would be
1. Hogan
2. Stone Cold Steve Austin
3. John Cena
4. The Rock
5. Undertaker

 

[mizowns]

I'll say it's easier to list who he isn't greater than in our favorite scripted sport.


Hogan most likely won't ever be surpassed being as he brought a ton of new eyes to the screen, held the title for 4 years on his first run and then of course the NWO.

Stone Cold takes the number 2 spot being as he brought quite a few new eyes to the screen and kept the WWE from losing to WCW.

Number 3 could be either Rock or Cena. I know a lot of people are going to say, Rock deserves the spot over Cena but Rock was "top" guy for 4 years. In that time period he was one of 4 top guys. SCSA and Rock might have been the 2 big names but do they deserve all the credit? I'd say Cena inches this spot from Rock. Yes the Attitude Era is held in higher regards but Cena has been wrestling for 3 times the length of the AE.

My list for WWE would be
1. Hogan
2. Stone Cold Steve Austin
3. John Cena
4. The Rock
5. Undertaker

IMO, The Rock is before Cena&Austin. The Rock is still a star and adapt to newer audience. He took over totally.

Undertaker before Ric Flair? You can see what people say about taker here. I'm not saying Taker is not a top 10 player, but some people don't think so. "He was never the face of the comapny, never the number 1 guy" and so on.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=291893&page=3

 

[Supreme Knowledge]

I have to agree with this. When you think of wrestling. WWE in particular, three names jump out at you, Hogan, Austin and the Rock. It almost a surety that no one will ever surpass them. But this is for fans that have been around awhile.

For some the PG Era might be the only one they know, so John Cena is already at the top of the list, and no one will ever surpass him. It really depends on who you speak too, how long they've been watching wrestling and how big of a fan they are.

There is one thing for sure though. No matter what era you're talking about, John Cena (stale or not, and I agree with that), has to be ranked up near the top of the class with the Flair and HBK's. He's carried this company for the last decade or so, and no other wrestler in the history of the WWE has been able to see they did that for that length of time. Love him or hate him, he always gets a reaction, and is still one of the best in the ring today.

See thats the thing, long time fans of pro wrestling have to be able to see pass bias in order to give Cena his proper credit. Alot of older fans, especially males hate his character now so can't see pass that bias. Cena is a bigger star than HBK or Undetaker, though it's hard for some to admit because of that attachment to nostalgia mixed with that hate for Cena.

Cena is this eras Rock, Austin, or Hogan. Thing is, Cena has been able to maintain his Star a lot longer than Austin or Rock (even if it may be due to injuries or leaving wrestling all together). Cena has also arguably given more to the business as well, his countless hours spent promoting, endorsing, and living the product is something to marvel.

Look if given a choice, no doubt about it I would choose Austin or Rock before Cena, but I am unbiased enough to know Cena has cemented himself next to those guys from his consistency and ability to put the WWE on his back for countless years as the top guy, something neither Rock nor Austin has done for the amount of time.

 

[Joseph718YaHurd]

If you think about it , Cena started wrestling in the Wwe before the Rock began his acting career , which was well over 12 years ago ... 15 world title reigns , not to mention all of the Great matches he's delivered and held his own in with the likes of Eddie Guerrero , Shawn Michaels , Randy Orton , Chris Benoit , Cm Punk , Kurt Angle , Edge , The Rock ? Only the best of the best , He's also main evented several Wrestlemania's ... Im not the Biggest cena fan in the World , but i also don't hate him enough to say he doesnt deliver ... So why doesn't he deserve to be considered one of the best ? Give the Guy some Credit ... He may not have done what other's were able to accomplish but tell me who did half the things that he's done ? Not many ..

 

[KingJoe316]

My objective top 10:
1. Hogan
2. Stone Cold Steve Austin
3. The Rock

A class by themselves

4. John Cena
5. The Undertaker
6. HBK
7. Bret Hart
8. The Macho Man Randy Savage
9. Andre the Giant
10. Bruno Sammartino

The Rock accomplished more in the year 2000 than Cena did in 12 years. I am not hating on Cena, as a matter of fact I put him right behind Rock, but Hogan, Austin and Rock were monsters in the wrestling and mainstream worlds. That is something that no other wrestlers, including Cena can claim.

 

[Supreme Knowledge]

The Rock accomplished more in the year 2000 than Cena did in 12 years.

Interesting, can you explain how the Rock in just the year 2000 alone surpasses Cena's 12 year body of work, I would love to hear how that breaks down.

 

[mizowns]

See thats the thing, long time fans of pro wrestling have to be able to see pass bias in order to give Cena his proper credit. Alot of older fans, especially males hate his character now so can't see pass that bias. Cena is a bigger star than HBK or Undetaker, though it's hard for some to admit because of that attachment to nostalgia mixed with that hate for Cena.

Cena is this eras Rock, Austin, or Hogan. Thing is, Cena has been able to maintain his Star a lot longer than Austin or Rock (even if it may be due to injuries or leaving wrestling all together). Cena has also arguably given more to the business as well, his countless hours spent promoting, endorsing, and living the product is something to marvel.

Look if given a choice, no doubt about it I would choose Austin or Rock before Cena, but I am unbiased enough to know Cena has cemented himself next to those guys from his consistency and ability to put the WWE on his back for countless years as the top guy, something neither Rock nor Austin has done for the amount of time.

I can just speak for myself, but I dont hate John Cena.

Some people may do it, but many people are like me "I just don't care about him that much". Not cheering him or boing him. His just Cena, sometimes funny, sometimes not funny. Sometimes good, sometimes not so good.

But what he is, is a star of his era. The worst era in wrestling.
Being "good" in the worst era, doesn't make you a great star in GREATEST OF ALL TIME list. It just makes you good in that era.

But not in greatest of all time list.

 

[Creepy Old Man]

I have no idea. It's totally subjective, and I don't quite have time to decide Cena's place in history. Top 10, I guess.

Let me tell you this, though. Nobody in history has ever been the willing, submissive WWE automaton that Cena has. WWE OWNS THIS LAPDOG'S NAME, for crying out loud. Yep, he signed it over, meaning he couldn't use his birth name in TNA. That how loyal this guy is to WWE, but not in a good way, more in a "here, take my very soul, crush it into dust and make WWE-branded anthrax out of it" kind of way. On Steve Austin's podcast, Cena says he doesn't like time off work, and when he's unwillingly in his house he learns foreign languages so he can "better promote WWE" in other markets. He told Peter Rosenberg he doesn't like HIS OWN FAMILY at WrestleMania because he could "jeopardise a business opportunity" by having to take care of them. I actually think the guy has a serious mental flaw. Or Maybe Vince spent millions having the Cyberdyne corporation build a T-101 that could wrestle.

But you know what, it ensures that when he hangs it up, HE WILL BE UNEQUIVOCALLY HAILED BY WWE AS THE SINGLE GREATEST PERFORMER IN HISTORY.

 

[Aeon Mathix]

As much as people on the internet hate to accept it, John Cena anywhere not near the top 5 of all time has no idea what they are talking about or are blinded by rage. Possibly both. John Cena is right behind Hogan, Austin and Rock. There is no doubt about it. When you ask a random person about wrestling nowadays who is the one person they can name that they have at least heard of? John Cena and it's not even close. He is the biggest star of the last decade and one of the biggest stars in the history of wrestling and there is no denying that.

In fact if I were to build a professional wrestler from the ground up (charisma, mic skills, in ring abilities, look etc.) John Cena would come the closest to my design in the history of wrestlers. Hes the blueprint of a professional wrestler. This is going to be a very unpopular opinion, but it's only because people think their favorites like Dolph Ziggler, CM Punk or whoever were held down by Cena or are just tired of him on top. That's fine but if people actually understood why Cena has been in his position for so long, then there wouldn't be an argument.

As for a top ten my list would look like this. Don't really need to make a list, but i am already here so whatever.

1. Hulk Hogan
2. Stone Cold Steve Austin
3. The Rock
4. John Cena
5. Shawn Michaels
6. Ric Flair
7. Bruno Sammartino
8. Andre The Giant
9. Sting
10. Triple H

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

John Cena is Top 10 but I am not about to put him in the Top 5 yet much less in the same level as Hogan, Austin, and The Rock.

I already made my points on why I don't think Cena is ranked as high but also keep in mind Cena didn't start carrying the WWE until 2010 after guys like HBK, Shawn Michaels, Undertaker, Ric Flair, and Batista all left or took limited roles.

I still put Shawn Michaels and Ric Flair at the #4 and #5 spot so the highest I can give Cena is #6. Then even that spot is arguable since I can make a case on why Mick Foley, Bruno Sammartino, and The Undertaker should be placed higher than Cena.

 

[Mudlup50]

As for a top ten my list would look like this. Don't really need to make a list, but i am already here so whatever.

1. Hulk Hogan
2. Stone Cold Steve Austin
3. The Rock
4. John Cena
5. Shawn Michaels
6. Ric Flair
7. Bruno Sammartino
8. Andre The Giant
9. Sting
10. Triple H

Your inclusion of Sting kinda baffles me to be honest, so why Sting over Taker and Trips?

IMO, The Rock is before Cena&Austin. The Rock is still a star and adapt to newer audience. He took over totally.

Undertaker before Ric Flair? You can see what people say about taker here. I'm not saying Taker is not a top 10 player, but some people don't think so. "He was never the face of the comapny, never the number 1 guy" and so on.

Personally I viewed this as just WWE/F which is why I didn't include Flair. Ric's time in WWF isn't really that impressive, yes he was the Nature Boy but still. 1 world title win, a list of great matches don't get me wrong, but for his time in WWE he does not deserve over quite a few legends, especially Taker.

I don't care if Taker was never the guy, I get why people do care about that, but to be fair Rock was only the guy for about a year, 2 if you stretch it. Taker was a top 5 guy from 1990-2010, 20 years of the company. He wrestled in the Hogan era(and was a big guy for a while in that era), the New Generation era(again not the guy but up there), the Attitude Era(aside from SCSA, Rock, McMahon, Trips he was the next guy), Ruthless Aggression(his character evolved and he still managed to cling to a top spot), PG era(he was Smackdown for a couple of years). Rock held the belt in 3 eras, yes 1 was the AE but the other 2 aren't held that high. I truly do get the argument on Taker, but he was always a few guys from the top, had SCSA and Rock left, it would have been Taker(debatable but I mean how isn't this thread).

Sorry for rant, I will admit I have personal bias here, Taker was why I started watching WWE but his accomplishments speak for themselves.

 

[Nate DaMac]

But what he is, is a star of his era. The worst era in wrestling.
Being "good" in the worst era, doesn't make you a great star in GREATEST OF ALL TIME list. It just makes you good in that era.

But not in greatest of all time list.

You keep saying that it's the worst era as if it's a fact. You can think that it's the worst era but in reality, it's far more successful than the mid 90s were when Hart and Michaels were at the top of the card.

So he's passed guys like Hart, Michaels, Triple H (The PG Era is also far more successful than the early to mid 2000s when Hunter was molesting the spotlight,) Taker (Who was never the guy,) etc. Still firmly behind Hogan, Austin, and The Rock.

 

[Wald]

Your inclusion of Sting kinda baffles me to be honest, so why Sting over Taker and Trips?

I'm not the guy you're asking but I'll answer anyway because I'd also have Sting over Triple H and Undertaker on a best of list. The reason why it shouldn't baffle is because Starrcade 97 solidified Sting as one of the top draws of all time. At the start of 1998, just before Steve Austin blew up the entire industry and right before the Attitude Era heralded the end of the idea of a wrestler or main event carrying an entire show, Sting vs Hollywood Hogan equalled the PPV buyrate of Wrestlemania V as the top drawing wrestling PPV of all time. So at the start of 1998 three wrestlers stood atop the top drawing stars of all time, Hulk Hogan, Macho Man Randy Savage and Sting. Not Ric Flair, not Bret Hart, not HBK or Undertaker, but those three.

This was still in the time of a main event being the absolute draw on the card and before Vince was able to stack a Wrestlemania with three or four main events per card. I'd argue that Hogan should take about 75% of the credit for the Wrestlemania V buyrate, as the story was about him regaining his world title, but I'd equally argue Sting was the 75% draw for his match against Hogan. The storyline of him disappearing, reappearing and chasing Hollywood Hogan is probably the best pro wrestling has ever done and he pulled it off masterfully and deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as a Flair, Hart, Savage HBK etc.

You may not agree with that assessment but you really shouldn't be baffled by someone having Sting as a higher pick than Undertaker or Triple H, both of whom's greatest achievement has been longevity at the top of Vince's company, which is a very good achievement and is something that I'm not taking anything away from.

 

[John McCass]

Hulk Hogan was the best of all time and he still is. Hulk Hogan can't be surpassed because he brought the eyes into wrestling. He made the bed for himself and coming generation. No one can surpass them. But, Cena has also done a lot of things. He needs to be give credit because he survived on the top of game for 10 years. Look, in this era, the programming is PG oriented and they have much competition than it had long ago. In the Attitude Era, we had competition with WCW. But, Steve Austin and The Rock and better programming also stopped the fans from quitting. Sure, before Attitude Era, it was PG but during that time it was a breathe of fresh air over daily soaps and Hogan deserves the praise he gets from everyone. When talking of giving more, no one has given more than Cena and I don't think can offer. Cena is a devotee to WWE and the amount of hardwork he has done in order to reach on top is incomparable to anyone. In this era, if the programming becomes stale we quite watching it because we have much better and more options in TNA, NJPW etc. Cena is shining in the worst era so, he needs the credit. He has stopped some fans from quitting. I give him more credit than Steve Austin and The Rock. Before bashing me, figure out my points.

1. You need two hands to clap.
What can John Cena do alond if he don't have a credible opponent? In the PG Era, the wrestlers of Cena's caliber are only CM Punk and Daniel Bryan. In Hogan Era, we had Andre The Giant, Randy Savage, Ricky Steamboat, The Ultimate Warrior to provide enough competion. In the Attitude Era, aside of The Rock and Austin we had Triple H, Mr. McMahon, Kurt Angle etc. as popular competitives to Rock and Austin.

2. Better Programming
In the Hogan Era, we had only one big promotion on TV or I think there should have been 1 or 2 more. People had no choice but WWF. But, I already stated Hogan can't be surpassed because, there was no Hogan, there should have been no pro wrestling. Now, come to Attitude Era. The most beloved era. The Era which can never be defined in words. The Rock and Steve Austin has offered much to WWF. But, there was also a much better programming and a bigger audience in that era. There was only one legitimate competition in the form of WCW. Here come, the Ruthless Agression Era, atleast my favourite era. This is where Cena started shining and this was awesome. But, in PG Era, loads of people quit WWE because of children focused programming. Now, WWE is not compelling as it was earlier. It also has many small competitions so, people quit this and watch other promotions.

After all this, Cena has managed to stay on top. He has been the top star even in these circumstances. I think he should be given place over The Rock and Steve Austin. I think he should be spot no. 2.

 

[nwojeff]

Interesting, can you explain how the Rock in just the year 2000 alone surpasses Cena's 12 year body of work, I would love to hear how that breaks down.

I'll take a stab at this one...Easy, 2000 was the most profitable and popular year in WWE history, and it was mainly due to The Rock, who was the undisputed face of the company from late 1999 through at least early 2001. Go back and look at the numbers when Rock was in his prime compared to 2002-present for Cena, or better yet, 2005-present, when Cena was truly on top as the man. There is no comparison.

Even with the huge advantage in longevity that Cena has over The Rock, Hogan, Austin, and Rock destroy him when you're talking about mainstream impact, crossover ability, pure celebrity, and money drawn (the most important factor of all).

Two quick semi-related notes here: First, no one ever talks about this, but Cena's world title reigns don't mean as much as those that came before September 2, 2002 and after December 15, 2013 because having two world titles in the company for more than 11 years was a complete joke and totally dilutes everyone's title reigns from that period. He can get to 20 title reigns, and Flair, Triple H and Hogan's title reigns are still way more impressive and impactful.

Second, I love how many people, even former stars in the business like Bret Hart, Roddy Piper, Jim Ross, etc., and a ton of fans, talk about how much the business has grown in the past 10-15 years. Um, no it hasn't. Financially, it's regressed and isn't nearly as big as it was from 1998-2000. From mid-2000 to the present, WWE has been in a constant state of gradual and sometimes rapid freefall, and who has been the captain of the sinking ship during the bulk of that time period? You guessed it, Frank Stallone. lol no but seriously, John Cena has been the main guy in an awful period in wrestling history, both content-wise and financially.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

In the Hogan Era, we had only one big promotion on TV or I think there should have been 1 or 2 more.

Actually, both WCW (NWA) and the AWA had plenty of TV coverage in the Hogan era so there was no "People had no choice but WWF" going on.

 

[John McCass]

Actually, both WCW (NWA) and the AWA had plenty of TV coverage in the Hogan era so there was no "People had no choice but WWF" going on.

Well,I didn't knew much about it. I have not watched wrestling of that time but, I accepted that Hogan should be praised for what he did. Atleast, he made the bed for up and coming generation of wrestlers.

 

[rmp0012002]

Geographically the AWA was bigger than the NWA and WWF. Hogan was a star during his first run in the WWF in around '81 for Vince Sr. and he was a big star in the AWA so if you were a fan you knew Hogan was already had a big following before the younger Vince brought him back to replace Backlund as top guy.
Wrestling was huge when TV came out in the 50's but Hogan made it popular again during the remainder of the 80's. Wrestling has always been cyclical but I don't think it comes back around this time.

 

[The Sychopath]

He's definitely in the top 10 no matter what anyone says. I wouldn't put him above Hogan, Austin, Rock, or Flair but probably more on the level of a Taker or Bret.

1. Hogan
2. Austin
3. Rock
4. Flair
5. Sammartino
6. Andre the Giant
7. Savage
8. Taker
9. Cena
10. HBK

Than right below that I'd have Bret at 11, than a mix of Sting, Piper, Foley, Race to round out top 15. But than you have to factor in the real old school guys too like Lou Thesz which is very hard to do since most wrestling fans never seen them wrestle.

 

[mizowns]

He's definitely in the top 10 no matter what anyone says. I wouldn't put him above Hogan, Austin, Rock, or Flair but probably more on the level of a Taker or Bret.

1. Hogan
2. Austin
3. Rock
4. Flair
5. Sammartino
6. Andre the Giant
7. Savage
8. Taker
9. Cena
10. HBK

Than right below that I'd have Bret at 11, than a mix of Sting, Piper, Foley, Race to round out top 15. But than you have to factor in the real old school guys too like Lou Thesz which is very hard to do since most wrestling fans never seen them wrestle.

It's pretty amazing to see you rank Cena before WWE choice "HBK" that got overrated when he retired. I don't disagree with you.

But just proces how the WWE machine try to pick their favourites and are not objective about Shawn Michaels who got overrated when he retired.

 

[The Sychopath]

It's pretty amazing to see you rank Cena before WWE choice "HBK" that got overrated when he retired. I don't disagree with you.

But just proces how the WWE machine try to pick their favourites and are not objective about Shawn Michaels who got overrated when he retired.

Absolutely Cena should be above HBK on an all time list. Of course there's no disputing the fact that HBK is leagues above Cena talent wise, but in terms of star power Cena easily beats him. HBK was never a big draw. I would consider putting Bret at #10, but HBKs run from 2002-2010 places him just a tiny bit above Bret in my opinion. If HBK never returned in 2002, than it wouldn't even be debatable that Bret is above him. The reason I placed Taker above Cena is mainly due to his longevity for being around for 25 years straight as one of the top guys. But I wouldn't argue with someone having Cena above him. And this is coming from someone that's not even a Cena fan really at all. He has his moments here & there but he's been pretty stale & boring to me for years now.