Cena going over HBK will be worse than punk going over hart.really?
I'm not totally sure what this means. Does it mean that you think Punk going over Hart was ridiculous. If so, that's the most intelligent thing in this post.
just because he's face of the company doesnt mean he gets the pie.
Actually, it does in this case.
He'll manage to get at best one fall and then what.
He'll get another one. Duh.
HBK has beaten the biggest names in buisness.Who has Cena beaten?huh?
HBK, for one. Then there's Orton, Triple H, Batista, Kurt Angle, Brock Lesnar, Chris Jericho, CM Punk, Rey Mysterio, Edge, The Big Show, Kane, The Great Khali and The Undertaker.
So basically anyone who's anyone.
HBK was in the company when the show's ratings were 7-8,cena's get hardly 3's.
Oh, you just had to walk into this one.
People give too much credence to ratings as it is (forgetting that the bottom line is profit). But this statement is just wrong in every way.
Let's say Raw's ratings peak occurred in 1999 (where these 7s and 8s that you speak occasionally occurred). HBK was only occasionally around that year, and was NOT an in-ring performer. If you want to look at the ratings for the year when HBK was on top in the WWE Raw (let's say 1995/6) the ratings were almost exclusively in the 2s. And this is when there were LESS channels.
Yes. Next.
Cena lost a match to a visitor of 8yrs where HBK won EC when no one thought he'd be the same after his injury.
So? Cena lost to The Rock. HBK would've lost in that situation too. The difference is, though, that HBK would never have been put in that position. Because he was never a really big draw.
Vote goes to HBK.
And isn't that just a little silly.