The policy that nobody important can lose a match

[Bobby B]

Am I the only one bothered by this? The WWE seems to feel that to keep heat and momentum on somebody they cannot lose a match at all costs without it being a DQ or some other screwy finish.

(not that it's a new thing) But take the Orton/Sheamus match at the weekend. They wanted Sheamus to keep his title, but didn't want Orton to lose face, so they had the screwjob finish. I really don't like this. If your going to build a competetitive division, that must be built on the idea that people can lose matches once in a while.

Would Orton have lost any momentum coming out of SummerSlam if Sheamus would have won? Perhaps a little bit, but not a great deal. It would've put Sheamus over in a major way.

The Nexus stuff this week was so depressing. We (and I'm talking creative here) want to put the Nexus guys over, but we can't be seen to have Randy Orton being beaten. But Nexus guys can't loose either. So we have 3 screwjob finishes, a tag-team win (to hide David Otunga), a proper win, and a defeat. If you don't want to have the big guys lose, then don't put them in the matches. I'd have much rather seen, Evan Bourne, Mark Henry and William Regal in these spots. Ok you wouldn't have filled the card with Nexus vs Raw undercard matches, but I'd have been much happier with that as a payoff rather than 3 screwy finishes.

Two of these made no sense either. Shouldn't Orton have won by DQ? And as for the Slater win - didn't him rolling back in the ring break the count? I've just watched Kurt Angle vs The Undertaker from No Way Out 2006 (Buy this DVD - that match is incredible) where Kurt Angle on a number of occasions rolled into the ring to break the count. Small things, but I definitely noticed them

The only person that seems to be put in that role is Chris Jericho. This may well be his own personal choice, but it's refreshing. Jericho put over Barrett in the week. Does it make Jericho look weak? No, it makes him look credible.

There's an old adage that is very relevant for this topic: "Life is not about never falling, it's about rising every time you fall". If the WWE adopted this attitude towards their main eventers, the division would be so much stronger.

 

[KnowYoRole]

How do you expect Justin Gabriel who was a mere rookie on NXT a few months ago to beat Randy Orton, a multiple time world champion, and arguably the most popular superstar in WWE as of late, cleanly? How do you expect Heath Slater who was also a rookie on NXT, to defeat Edge, a main eventer and a 9 time world champion? You can't have them beat them cleanly because it just doesn't make sense for them to defeat superstars of their caliber. Wade Barrett going over Jericho cleanly makes sense because he was the winner of NXT, the WWE's next breakout star, and is the LEADER of the Nexus, the most dominant faction of the decade. Skip Sheffield going over John morrison makes sense because he is the second most over member of the Nexus and is a powerhouse and morrison isn't a main event talent anyway.

And it looks much better for a rookie to win via DQ or countout against a huge star like orton or cena, rather than dominating jobbers like regal or bourne, because you can only gain so much credibility by defeating lower card talents like those two.

and those screwy finishes like slater rolling into the ring make them seem smart and calculating, and they're heels anyway.

 

[Bobby B]

And how much credibility does Justin Gabriel get by beating Randy Orton by DQ? If you don't feel he's ready (which is right) then don't put them together in the match in the first place.

The thread was started more about the main event picture - although it timed in very nicely with the screwjob finishes on monday too.

 

[CJ The Pirate]

The reason behind the DQ finish at Summerslam was to allow Orton, despite the stipulation that if he lost he'd go to the bottom of the pile, to have a rematch, thus furthering the feud. I think it's very well known that Triple H is to feud with Sheamus when he returns and with all the other heels currently involved with Nexus, adding what will likely be another month or two of Sheamus Vs Orton makes a lot of sense.

As for the Nexus winning their matches in unspectacular fashion? That's rubbish talking. Firstly, a count out victory is not a screw job finish so Slater's win over Edge was absolutely fine. It portrayed him as a smart guy with great ring awareness. A win is a win nevertheless.
As for Orton losing to Gabriel... Sheamus came out and Orton lost all interest in the match he has no personal stake in for the man who cost him the title 24 hours earlier. Orton didn't care for the outcome of the match, he cared only about serving Sheamus more punishment.

What we got on Monday was a Raw that featured 8 matches. That is amazing for a Raw, especially one coming off a PPV. The matches featured some of the best on the roster against a group of rookies who haven't had the chance to show what they can do individually to so many people before. I expect that Raw was the first time many people had seen the former NXT guys in one on one competition before. It was very good for them to be given the chance to compete against these guys.

 

[Mark0820]

How do you expect Justin Gabriel who was a mere rookie on NXT a few months ago to beat Randy Orton, a multiple time world champion, and arguably the most popular superstar in WWE as of late, cleanly? How do you expect Heath Slater who was also a rookie on NXT, to defeat Edge, a main eventer and a 9 time world champion? You can't have them beat them cleanly because it just doesn't make sense for them to defeat superstars of their caliber. Wade Barrett going over Jericho cleanly makes sense because he was the winner of NXT, the WWE's next breakout star, and is the LEADER of the Nexus, the most dominant faction of the decade. Skip Sheffield going over John morrison makes sense because he is the second most over member of the Nexus and is a powerhouse and morrison isn't a main event talent anyway.

And it looks much better for a rookie to win via DQ or countout against a huge star like orton or cena, rather than dominating jobbers like regal or bourne, because you can only gain so much credibility by defeating lower card talents like those two.

and those screwy finishes like slater rolling into the ring make them seem smart and calculating, and they're heels anyway.

You mean like Barrett pinning Jericho cleanly? The same Jericho(28 titles) who's held more titles than Orton(8 titles) and Cena(14 titles) combined. You don't put guys who aren't ready in matches against top guys if that's the case. Gabriel beating Orton by count out means nothing. Same with Slater beating Edge via count out. If they beat them so badly that they couldn't answer the count of 10, sure, but Orton was fighting Sheamus and Slater slid in before the 10 count and Edge was fine. Edge just didn't pay attention to the ref and got counted out. They gained nothing that way. It would have been better for them to come out and dominate guys like Regal in squash matches. Let them show they are above that tier of guys. This way just made them look like they needed the ME guys to forget to pay attention to the guy shouting a count or outside help to win. At least Barrett, Skip and Otunga got clean wins.

 

[KnowYoRole]

The whole point of the Nexus members being put into matches with the Team WWE members was so that the Nexus would achieve redemption. How would they redeem themselves by fighting people other than the guys on team WWE?

 

[OlderFan]

Does anyone think that a clean finish could be credible depending on how it was done. Case in point, remember when 1-2-3 kid beat Razor Ramon the first time? Granted, that had a healthy dose of "blind luck" but it was still a clean pin.

 

[King_of_Swing1520]

The whole point of the Nexus members being put into matches with the Team WWE members was so that the Nexus would achieve redemption. How would they redeem themselves by fighting people other than the guys on team WWE?

exactlly

the only thing that was bad about this is that they had so many matches end in an "unclean" way.

and orton losing to sheamus clean would not have hurt orton one bit. sheamus seems dominant but he has yet to get a true decisive victory. beating orton would have given that final push to a true ME

 

[Zigglerfan227]

You know, I am all for The Nexus and everything but the wins they got this week was almost INSANELY unbelievable. I have now decided that I only like the Nexus when they are a group because a few of them just doesn't seem believable on their own.
It was bad enough for Jericho to be beaten so easily (in my opinion) but then we see Edge and Orton get beat to! I know it was by ring-out but it is still stupid.

Anyway, WWE should keep Nexus as a group as much as possible and as single wrestlers as less as possible.

 

[Bernkastel]

And how much credibility does Justin Gabriel get by beating Randy Orton by DQ? If you don't feel he's ready (which is right) then don't put them together in the match in the first place.

The thread was started more about the main event picture - although it timed in very nicely with the screwjob finishes on monday too.

But that's the thing though, it's not about just one person in the NEXUS, it's the faction as a whole. The NEXUS is being pushed as stable that can pose a threat to anyone on the roster. NEXUS has already beaten the likes of Mark Henry and Evan Bourne, so it doesn't make any sense to keep feeding them to NEXUS members.

However, in a one on one match, guys like Orton and Edge would lose more credibility (especially Orton) than any of the NEXUS members would gain individually if they were to lose by pinfall.

A DQ finish not only makes the NEXUS, as individuals, look strong against main event opponents, but it doesn't kill any momentum or credibility of the main eventers.

 

[Bobby B]

A DQ finish not only makes the NEXUS, as individuals, look strong against main event opponents, but it doesn't kill any momentum or credibility of the main eventers.

NO IT DOESN'T

A DQ/Count-out/other screwy finish does nothing to help Nexus look strong. Did Michael Tarver getting his arse handed to him by Daniel Bryan for 5 minutes before winning by roll-up make Michael Tarver look strong? No - it made it seem like the only chance he had of winning was by outside interference.

Barrett looked strong, Skip looked strong - that was it. Gabriel got hammered, Otunga was hidden, Slater looked average, Tarver looked awful and Young looked awful.

Monday night did absolutely nothing to improve the credibility of the Nexus.

 

[Bernkastel]

NO IT DOESN'T

A DQ/Count-out/other screwy finish does nothing to help Nexus look strong. Did Michael Tarver getting his arse handed to him by Daniel Bryan for 5 minutes before winning by roll-up make Michael Tarver look strong? No - it made it seem like the only chance he had of winning was by outside interference.

Barrett looked strong, Skip looked strong - that was it. Gabriel got hammered, Otunga was hidden, Slater looked average, Tarver looked awful and Young looked awful.

Monday night did absolutely nothing to improve the credibility of the Nexus.

Dude, you are missing my point entirely; I'm going to explain it to you again so that you get it, so pay attention...

It does not matter how the NEXUS members appear as individuals; the only thing that matters is how the NEXUS appears as a group.

It's a group called the NEXUS, not Wade Barrett, Skip Sheffield, David Otunga, Justin Gabriel, and Heath Slater.

Who cares how the NEXUS members won their matches, as long as they won. DQ, countout, pin who cares... as long as they won. If Slater and Gabriel had lost their matches, then the group as a whole would have looked weak.

Let me focus on the Gabriel/ Orton match, because that seems to have you the most upset. I've already explained why Gabriel could not have lost, but Orton is the the Number 1 contender to the WWE Championship.
If Orton had lost that match by pinfall, then who could ever take him seriously as a legit threat to Sheamus? No one...

The DQ was the best way to end that match, as was countout finish to the Edge/ Slater match; because it's not about how the NEXUS members look as individuals, but as a group.

 

[Mark0820]

Dude, you are missing my point entirely; I'm going to explain it to you again so that you get it, so pay attention...

It does not matter how the NEXUS members appear as individuals; the only thing that matters is how the NEXUS appears as a group.

It's a group called the NEXUS, not Wade Barrett, Skip Sheffield, David Otunga, Justin Gabriel, and Heath Slater.

Who cares how the NEXUS members won their matches, as long as they won. DQ, countout, pin who cares... as long as they won. If Slater and Gabriel had lost their matches, then the group as a whole would have looked weak.

Let me focus on the Gabriel/ Orton match, because that seems to have you the most upset. I've already explained why Gabriel could not have lost, but Orton is the the Number 1 contender to the WWE Championship.
If Orton had lost that match by pinfall, then who could ever take him seriously as a legit threat to Sheamus? No one...

The DQ was the best way to end that match, as was countout finish to the Edge/ Slater match; because it's not about how the NEXUS members look as individuals, but as a group.

No, you're missing the point. You can get 7 random guys together and they can beat up any one man. The NWO ultimately succeeded because it was three top guys that could beat anyone. Nexus is 7(now 6) guys taking out one guy at a time. That's good until a point. You need to make all six look strong on their own or the stable ultimately fails when the roster finally unites against them. The stronger the individual guys, the stronger the group ends up being.

 

[Bernkastel]

No, you're missing the point. You can get 7 random guys together and they can beat up any one man. The NWO ultimately succeeded because it was three top guys that could beat anyone. Nexus is 7(now 6) guys taking out one guy at a time. That's good until a point. You need to make all six look strong on their own or the stable ultimately fails when the roster finally unites against them. The stronger the individual guys, the stronger the group ends up being.

NEXUS is a group taking out one guy at a time, huh? Really, so that 7 on 7 match I just saw a week ago was just a figment of my imagination, right? NEXUS is still being billed as a group; a group still hell bent on destruction.

The match at Summerslam proved that the RAW roster was going to lie down, and they stopped the NEXUS; however, the NEXUS is still being billed as a group, not as individuals. That's my point.

The whole point of the last RAW was for NEXUS as a group to weed out any weak links, not to prove how strong they were as individuals. 6 out of the 7 members walked away that night with wins, therefore, the group of NEXUS still appears to be strong.

There's no point in making NEXUS look strong individually until the group breaks up.

 

[Rckstrtmmy]

Back to your original point....I agree that the upper echelon stars need to lose clean every once in a while...even if it's a sneaky type victory that's acceptable for the heels. I think people are sick of the predictability more than anything. If John Cena got rolled up once in a while people would probably hate him less because it makes him look like a more vulnerable and people support that. I'm not saying he should job to Santino but somebody needs to pin the bastard once in a while. I remember when Austin, HHH, The Rock, Foley, Undertaker etc used to feud with each other and they ALL lost matches clean. It's bullshit to think that losses stop all momentum...good matches with good finishes that further storylines will help BOTH parties not just the winner.

 

[kingofkings01013]

I just watched Raw cause i had it on DVR. Between Summerslam and Raw Nexus came off stronger on Summerslam but weak on Raw because of all the dumb DQ's and count outs. Jericho got pinned and i applauded either creative or Jericho for realizing (who ever decide it) a pin is ok. Edge could easily have gotten pinned or speared the steel pole in the ring and got rolled up. The Orton count out is fine in my book if it is the only weird ending, but after all the BS at Summerslam Raw was just too much. Creative has to get "creative" and stop with the count outs / DQ for at least 90 days you used it all up seriously that well is way dry now.

In Regards to Orton vs. Seamus you could have had Seamus pin Orton but not cleanly. Seamus could have used the tights or the ropes, heels can cheat it is allowed. Than on some future date you could have the Raw GM say since you tried to get rid of Orton by cheating, but we saw it on replay their will be a rematch.

 

[Bernkastel]

Back to your original point....I agree that the upper echelon stars need to lose clean every once in a while...even if it's a sneaky type victory that's acceptable for the heels. I think people are sick of the predictability more than anything. If John Cena got rolled up once in a while people would probably hate him less because it makes him look like a more vulnerable and people support that. I'm not saying he should job to Santino but somebody needs to pin the bastard once in a while. I remember when Austin, HHH, The Rock, Foley, Undertaker etc used to feud with each other and they ALL lost matches clean. It's bullshit to think that losses stop all momentum...good matches with good finishes that further storylines will help BOTH parties not just the winner.

Then using last night, and PPV's are bad examples. I admit that the ending to the Sheamus/ Orton upset me, but I was happy with the outcome of the NEXUS match. The sole purpose the next night on RAW, was to show that NEXUS was still strong as a group.

And hell, Jericho lost cleanly to Barrett that night... there's an example of that unpredictability.

 

[Hart316]

WORST MONDAY NIGHT RAW IVE EVER SEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ive seen just about every raw since septemeber 1995, back when diesel aka nash was wwe champ, ok so ive seen a little bit of wrestling. Worst raw ive ever seen, way to "fakey" i was just about done with wwe, i think this past raw ruined it forever.

 

[Rulk25]

To address these things
Yes Orton should have buts not until Sheamus throws a punch and you could argue that the ref was too far away to see it by then

To the second point not having the match in front of me I think you are misrecalling (either that or Kurt screwed up)
It was not the act of Kurt rolling into the ring that would break up the count but rather him roling in and then immediately back out

If it was the other case Counts out would almost never happen as they almost always involve beating the count back in and one wrestler not.

Two of these made no sense either. Shouldn't Orton have won by DQ? And as for the Slater win - didn't him rolling back in the ring break the count? I've just watched Kurt Angle vs The Undertaker from No Way Out 2006 (Buy this DVD - that match is incredible) where Kurt Angle on a number of occasions rolled into the ring to break the count. Small things, but I definitely noticed them.

 

[The Best At What I Do]

I agree completely with your general idea. It seems like WWE refuses to let anyone go over their big names which is hindering the product because the only way they're going to make new credible main-eventers is by having the new guys prove they can beat the currents guys on top.

The WWE realized the hole they've dug themselves into these past couple years and are now scrambling to get younger guys over. But at the same time they still refuse to have their top dogs lose clean for fear of making them look weak in any way.

Think about it: When was the last time John Cena lost cleanly 1-2-3? I'll tell you when. Last year to Triple H. When was the last time Triple H lost cleanly 1-2-3? Hell if I know. Now it seems like they're doing it to Randy Orton. He's been on an absolute tear through the roster and now looks unstoppable.

They need to realize that they can't constantly keep using Chris Jericho (even though he is the best in the world at what he does) to get everyone over by laying down. They need to start having some of the newer guys legitimately beat the guys at the top of the mountain if they ever want to create new stars we can take seriously. Trust me WWE, Cena taking a clean loss is not going to end his career but it will make someone else's.

 

[Mark0820]

NEXUS is a group taking out one guy at a time, huh? Really, so that 7 on 7 match I just saw a week ago was just a figment of my imagination, right? NEXUS is still being billed as a group; a group still hell bent on destruction.

Yes, they are. They've had two matches against teams as a group. One the won against jobbers that they won and one against the mid card and ME Raw guys that they lost. Please name me all the other matches they've had as a group. I'll wait.

The match at Summerslam proved that the RAW roster was going to lie down, and they stopped the NEXUS; however, the NEXUS is still being billed as a group, not as individuals. That's my point.

And you're still wrong. The Four Horsemen were four strong competitors. They were the best the NWA and WCW had to offer. The NWO was a stable of ME guys. DX was IC champs, tag champs and a world champ. Look at every successful stable. All the individuals are strong individually. Every member of those groups was able to go with anyone on the roster on any given night.

The whole point of the last RAW was for NEXUS as a group to weed out any weak links, not to prove how strong they were as individuals. 6 out of the 7 members walked away that night with wins, therefore, the group of NEXUS still appears to be strong.

No, it wasn't. It was to build Nexus, which it failed to do. Barrett, Otunga and Skip were the only three to come away with clean wins. Otunga and Skip in a tag match. The rest were screw job finishes. Tarver won after getting chumped for five minutes by Danielson thanks to interference from the Miz and Riley. Slater beat Edge thanks to Edge forgetting how to count to 10. Gabriel won after getting beaten up badly by Orton for their entire match thanks to interference by Sheamus. Then Young lost to Cena.

There's no point in making NEXUS look strong individually until the group breaks up.

I'm very glad you aren't booking a wrestling show because it's clear you have no idea what a strong stable consists of.

 

[Bernkastel]

Yes, they are. They've had two matches against teams as a group. One the won against jobbers that they won and one against the mid card and ME Raw guys that they lost. Please name me all the other matches they've had as a group.

What I saw were six men scoring six wins for the strength of their faction; my point that was that everything the NEXUS does, they do as a group. Whenever they act as individuals, they do so to enhance the appearence of the group.

As a group they dominated one match, and nearly defeated an All Star team in the main event at one of WWE's biggest PPV.

And you're still wrong. The Four Horsemen were four strong competitors. They were the best the NWA and WCW had to offer. The NWO was a stable of ME guys. DX was IC champs, tag champs and a world champ. Look at every successful stable. All the individuals are strong individually. Every member of those groups was able to go with anyone on the roster on any given night.

I don't understand what you're trying to say...NEXUS is also a faction that has been built up as a legitament threat to everyone on the roster. All of those others factions also acted as a unit at one point or another during their existences, so I'm not seeing the difference between them and NEXUS.

No, it wasn't. It was to build Nexus, which it failed to do.

How? 6 out of the 7 members won their matches, how is that not making the group look strong?

Barrett, Otunga and Skip were the only three to come away with clean wins. Otunga and Skip in a tag match. The rest were screw job finishes. Tarver won after getting chumped for five minutes by Danielson thanks to interference from the Miz and Riley. Slater beat Edge thanks to Edge forgetting how to count to 10. Gabriel won after getting beaten up badly by Orton for their entire match thanks to interference by Sheamus. Then Young lost to Cena.

NEXUS is still being billed as a cohessive unit. When the strength of the individuals begins to outweight the strength of the group, that's when the faction begins to crumble... that was the downfall of all the other factions you just mentioned. Eventually that will be the downfall of the NEXUS as well, somewhere down the road, but as of right now they are still being billed as a group.

I'm very glad you aren't booking a wrestling show because it's clear you have no idea what a strong stable consists of.

Factions have a leader and underlings. Even with Barrett as the leader, he has stated that the strength of the group is equal... and that the strength of the group as individuals... is also equal.

The whole point of last week RAW was about reestablishing NEXUS's strength as a group; a cohesssive unit... not as individuals.

If it was about the individuals, the NEXUS would have turned on Barrett, and not on the weakest link of the group, Darren Young.

 

[CyDeez]

Am I the only one bothered by this? The WWE seems to feel that to keep heat and momentum on somebody they cannot lose a match at all costs without it being a DQ or some other screwy finish.

(not that it's a new thing) But take the Orton/Sheamus match at the weekend. They wanted Sheamus to keep his title, but didn't want Orton to lose face, so they had the screwjob finish. I really don't like this. If your going to build a competetitive division, that must be built on the idea that people can lose matches once in a while.

Would Orton have lost any momentum coming out of SummerSlam if Sheamus would have won? Perhaps a little bit, but not a great deal. It would've put Sheamus over in a major way.

The Nexus stuff this week was so depressing. We (and I'm talking creative here) want to put the Nexus guys over, but we can't be seen to have Randy Orton being beaten. But Nexus guys can't loose either. So we have 3 screwjob finishes, a tag-team win (to hide David Otunga), a proper win, and a defeat. If you don't want to have the big guys lose, then don't put them in the matches. I'd have much rather seen, Evan Bourne, Mark Henry and William Regal in these spots. Ok you wouldn't have filled the card with Nexus vs Raw undercard matches, but I'd have been much happier with that as a payoff rather than 3 screwy finishes.



The only person that seems to be put in that role is Chris Jericho. This may well be his own personal choice, but it's refreshing. Jericho put over Barrett in the week. Does it make Jericho look weak? No, it makes him look credible.

There's an old adage that is very relevant for this topic: "Life is not about never falling, it's about rising every time you fall". If the WWE adopted this attitude towards their main eventers, the division would be so much stronger.

It's called a push. They do rise when they fall. Every match that they win. A lot of times they are being beaten in a match or it looks impossible for them to win. Then they get that adrenaline rush and hit their finisher, excite the crowd and win the match.

It IS a momentum thing. When someone is getting a push or in some sort of run, losing does defeat the purpose to a certain extent. The point or reasoning is to get said person OVER. You can't exactly put someone over, or consider them to have Main Event value, if they are losing.

When a wrestler goes on a streak or run without losing. It creates excitement, it creates a buzz. It brings attention! Even guys who are already established. How could WWE use Cena as their Face of the company if their "brightest star" (In Their Eyes) is always losing? Or is notorious for losing the big match all the time. That is not what WWE wants their company front runner to be, or competition for that front runner!

Storylines are ran in a way to get the final point across, at all costs. Sometimes things in the meantime don't always make the most sense.

But, to put over both guys in a match or whatever, sometimes a DQ or Count Out is a way to have a match ended without either guy losing face, within their own particular feud or a feud with each other. Therefore, their momentum continues with the simple fact they were not pinned or submitted.

 

[drobs85]

What I saw were six men scoring six wins for the strength of their faction; my point that was that everything the NEXUS does, they do as a group. Whenever they act as individuals, they do so to enhance the appearence of the group.

As a group they dominated one match, and nearly defeated an All Star team in the main event at one of WWE's biggest PPV.



I don't understand what you're trying to say...NEXUS is also a faction that has been built up as a legitament threat to everyone on the roster. All of those others factions also acted as a unit at one point or another during their existences, so I'm not seeing the difference between them and NEXUS.




How? 6 out of the 7 members won their matches, how is that not making the group look strong?




NEXUS is still being billed as a cohessive unit. When the strength of the individuals begins to outweight the strength of the group, that's when the faction begins to crumble... that was the downfall of all the other factions you just mentioned. Eventually that will be the downfall of the NEXUS as well, somewhere down the road, but as of right now they are still being billed as a group.



Factions have a leader and underlings. Even with Barrett as the leader, he has stated that the strength of the group is equal... and that the strength of the group as individuals... is also equal.

The whole point of last week RAW was about reestablishing NEXUS's strength as a group; a cohesssive unit... not as individuals.

If it was about the individuals, the NEXUS would have turned on Barrett, and not on the weakest link of the group, Darren Young.

What made Young the weakest Link. He clearly is better than slater and otunga. Hell Barrett tapped to the same guy in cena that young did. So wouldnt that make Barrett weak as well?

 

[Boondocks]

Ever notice how RAW is definately not the same, be it better or worse, depending on whose eyes, without Chris Jericho on it? He is important whether his cult following are cheering for him through the boos, or he's drawing immense heat from the ones he calls parasites. Yet, he has lost CLEANLY to Barrett, Cena (Even though he's kinda more important), and Evan Bourne over the past 3 months? He's one of the most important pieces to RAW in my opinion. To a fan like me, who appreciates their ability, not their face/heel status, he's THE best in the WWE. He's gold as a heel on the mic, and tells a story with his matches amazingly. And he loses cleanly a LOT. Point in case?