No you missed my point dumbass.. when everybody takes him to the limit it doesn't mean anything
Battleground 2015 LD
- Thread starter klunderbunker
- Start date
No you missed my point dumbass.. when everybody takes him to the limit it doesn't mean anything
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
whatever Smarky McSmarkerton. By that logic I guess Cena is just that much better than everybody else.
Instead of giving an educated response you insult me. Thanks for proving your lack of intelligence
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
The Holy One
What's really good?
Hey man, don't take it out on me that the Falcunts gave away 20 years of greatness for literally nothing. I didn't make that trade.
BTW, congrats on that sweep. I'm glad you got to witness that at least once in your adult life, while I've gotten to see the Saints sweep the Falcunts 5 times since the Sean Payton/Drew Brees era began
Well get ready to see them Falcons sweeps just like the good old days, b/c your midget QB is looking to have one foot out the door. No Mike Smith to help you now.
I'm sorry are you serious right now? Hold on for one second...
.....ok I'm good. He looked like he got lucky against Ambrose at MITB, and please point out the times he looked strong during his MITB run, b/c it surely wasn't all the times he need Kane to beat Ambrose, or the time he got pinned by Ziggler at Survivor Series, or the time he needed Lensar to beat Cena, or the time he needed J & J and the briefcase just to put Lesnar down which ended up failing. So please help me out here. I would like to point out that I'm not complaining about his booking. I like it actually, Seth plays a great conniving, privileged heel.Not with the way Seth and Lesnar have been booked, guaranteed there would've been a lot of bitching if Seth started to hang with Lesnar. And Lesnar didn't necessarily get manhandled. It took a low blow from Taker just to get the upperhand, but of course that wouldn't fit your narrative.
Please find posts where I was celebrating that match and shitting on the NOC match.
The Summerslam match was something different at the time, so I applauded that, but at the same time I shitted on WWE for not booking Lesnar like that from the get-go (the HHH matches, specifically).
And I didn't get offended at all about Cena putting up a fight at NOC. But why not let Seth put up some kind of fight? Is it really not that believable? If not, then he shouldn't be fucking champ in the first place. But Brock and Seth could have torn the house down last night, and instead we got a one-sided 9 minute match with a ******ed ending.
Did I single you out as having that opinion or did I say "people"? So why does Brock match with Seth have to be different than his match with Cena? Both were WHC that got destroyed by Brock, what's the difference in that one gets to be treated better than the other? And if Brock and Seth meet again, then he can get offense then much like in the NOC match b/w Brock and Cena.
Except that he didn't really make him look a chump, Taker has always made peopled disappear in the past where was your outrage then? Once again get the stick out of your ass and just enjoy the show. This is really not something to get mad about.
Yes, i called you a dumbass, but I gave you an educated response also. If you're gonna insult me, at least add an educated reponse as well. Otherwise you're just proving that i'm right
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
Educated? You gave me the most smarkiest, uninformed response imaginable.
No I gave you fucking facts.. the ones who break the John Cena overcoming the odds formula are the ones that turn into stars. Look at Lesnar, Punk, Bryan, Edge, Orton; all of them came out of their feuds on TOP. Now look where they are , all major stars. These are people that Cena rightfully put over. Now look at the other side. Sheamus is an exception, he came out of the Cena feud on top but hes still not a legit draw because he just lacks charisma. Cena put him over; its Sheamus's fault that he can't draw
Rusev, Wyatt, Ryback, Owens, Khali, Umaga, Miz, Barrett, Ziggler.. all people that feuded with Cena and came out on the losing end. Pretty much EVERYBODY that Cena feuds with "takes him to the limit". Look where some of these guys are. Some may have momentum, like Ryback and Wyatt, but thats not because of the Cena feud.
The Holy One
What's really good?
Uh no..don't believe I did, it really doesn't matter how much you win if you don't have the talent to back it up. Nor does it matter how much you lose, if you can keep the audience invested. Newsflash, Owens is a mid carder right now, so he lost to the top guy in the company. OMG his career is over, he'll never recover from this how dare an up and coming talent lose to the top guy in the company:
[YOUTUBE]2UkeqrnXCnY[/YOUTUBE]
And mind you, the only win he ever got against Bret was via DQ.
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
That is a blatant lie and you know it. Your hate for Cena, and not understanding anything about the current industry, really does know no bounds does it? I'm surprised you haven't made the "five moves of doom" argument yet.
Please prove me wrong then. Everyone who has fallen to the formula and lost the feud with Cena has not gained much.
Instead of insulting me and telling me i don't know anything, please provide facts to prove me wrong.
How many times do I have to say this? I don't hate Cena, I just hate how his marks treat him like a god
I'm sorry are you serious right now? Hold on for one second...
LOL watch the match again. Rollins kicked Ambrose's fucking ass for like the final 10 minutes of it. He couldn't keep Ambrose down in the end, who somehow got up and gave himself a chance by climbing the ladder and grabbing the belt just as Seth was grabbing it, but that doesn't neglect the fact that Seth dominated the majority of that match and looked like a real champion (for once) throughout it.
There were weasel, chickenshit ways about Rollins during his MITB run, no doubt, but it wasn't anywhere near to the extent as its been since post 'Mania (outside of the MITB match against Ambrose).
Watch the triple threat match again, IMO the match of the year. Rollins SHINED in that match and stole the show. I don't mind a guy playing a chickenshit heel, as long as he's given moments to shine and show his greatness and why he's champion (Edge and HHH always got those moments). Rollins had plenty of those opportunities when he had the MITB briefcase, but they've been few and far in-between since he became champion, which makes zero sense.
Yeah, by morons. Not by me though.
LOL, Lesnar was practically as fresh as could be, and Taker kicked his ass. Sure it took a low blow, but so what? It was a fight and Taker kicked his ass. That's the bottom line.
Basically this means that anyone who can kick Lesnar in the nuts can beat him up. Awesome little fact to know.
You were addressing me specifically though and I'm really the only person bitching about this, lol. Everyone else is on about Owens/Cena, which I couldn't care less about.
They're not going to meet again most likely, that's the problem here.
You make some horrible assumptions sometimes man.
See, I'm about to say something and you're going to twist it by saying this is the reason I'm really complaining, but I'm going to say it anyway... I literally have never liked the Undertaker's gimmick. Even as a kid, I thought it was too fake and ridiculous. Same for Kane. It wasn't until 'Taker started having great matches until around 2002/2003 when I finally started warming up to him, but as a character? I NEVER liked the deadman gimmick. I've expressed this on this forum in the past in posts I'm sure I can find if you'd like, just to show I'm not talking out of my ass here.
Also, if Taker is so easily able to make people disappear, then why didn't he make all the wrestlers holding him back tonight disappear? It's fucking stupid, man.
Come on Holy, you're better than this.
Please don't talk to me like I'm some miserable smark prick who doesn't enjoy anything. I'm usually pretty positive. But I thought last's night main event, a match I very much have been looking forward to, was atrociously booked and I hated everything about it. I can't force myself to like something. And this forum is for expressing your opinions on wrestling, so I immediately came here following the show to share my disdain of the outcome. Why does that bother you? Can I not not like something? I paid $9.99 like everyone else to tune in last night.... it's just my opinion that the main event was shit.
Bernkastel
Reaper of Miracles
You are circling your argument at this point. You've been given recent examples in both Wyatt and Ryback. According to you a star cannot be considered top class unless they have a winning series against Cena, which is not only wrong, but also totally stupid. Because if everyone started beating Cena, then it wouldn't mean jack when someone did.
No, god damn you FUCKING DOOFUS. it is YOU who is circling your argument. How many fucking times do i have to explain myself? Please read my previous posts about Wyatt and Ryback. Are you blind? Are you trolling? I don't even know why I am wasting SO much time arguing with you. I'm done with you
The Holy One
What's really good?
Yet despite everything he did (which was really just targeting Ambrose leg like a smart heel), he still didn't put him down which made him seem lucky that Ambrose couldn't hold on to the title. It still made him look opportunistic more than anything.
There literally has not been a change in how he's been handled b/w holding the MITB and WHC. Kane and J&J were still there. Hell I would argue that he's looked better since WM as he's actually tried to do it without help a couple of times. You have only one example of him looking strong while holding the MITB, and even though it's a great example, it's still just one.
Which is why I don't necessarily agree with Lesnar's booking as I feel whoever does eventually beat him will still receive backlash instead of appreciation as at this point people are probably only going to accept their personal favorite to be that guy instead of looking at the story that would be told.
Well considering the man law violator is one of the most legendary figures in WWE history, I would consider his nut kick to hold a little more weight than the average joe. All he really did after that was 2 Tombstones, not like he obliterated him like Lesnar has done to opponents this past year.
Glad to see you're not that irrational,
I thought that about Lesnar/Taker, but lo and behold here we are.
You make some horrible assumptions sometimes man.
See, I'm about to say something and you're going to twist it by saying this is the reason I'm really complaining, but I'm going to say it anyway... I literally have never liked the Undertaker's gimmick. Even as a kid, I thought it was too fake and ridiculous. Same for Kane. It wasn't until 'Taker started having great matches until around 2002/2003 when I finally started warming up to him, but as a character? I NEVER liked the deadman gimmick. I've expressed this on this forum in the past in posts I'm sure I can find if you'd like, just to show I'm not talking out of my ass here.
Also, if Taker is so easily able to make people disappear, then why didn't he make all the wrestlers holding him back tonight disappear? It's fucking stupid, man.
Well considering you made it a point to complain about him making disappearances happen, I kind of figured you had a problem with his gimmick. Of course, I must admit that I barely pay attention to anything that you post about anything ever. Look, I get that the supernatural gimmick isn't for you, I really don't care for the super beast, Brock Lesnar, to be honest. I think he's doing more damage to the roster than helping and he's going have to be more than suplexes if he's looking to honor that new contract.
The stick in your ass comment, while in response to you, was really meant for the other complainers. I honestly feel like people are watching these shows now just to complain. I find wrestling to be in a very good groove right now with WWE, NXT, ROH, NJPW, and TNA (product wise at least). Yet, most of the time all I see is doom and rage over the little things. This really goes back to Spoodbeast who claimed Dean Ambrose career was over after his lost at HIAC. I understand if you're disappointed with the results as we are all still fans, but you can't be making outrageous claims that you don't even have any ground to make it.
Spidey Revivey
Porn is okay here long as it ain't dudes.
All I learned from this LD is that a guy can run through an entire roster, become the top champion multiple times, break a 20+ year winning streak, be booked as more important than a title, yet magically lose all credibility if he is beaten by one man and therefore turned into a comedy jobber.
People here suck. It's like you fucks can't suspend disbelief and enjoy the fictional sport anymore- you have to bitch to get off on it.
People here suck. It's like you fucks can't suspend disbelief and enjoy the fictional sport anymore- you have to bitch to get off on it.
Bruh you are TOTALLY missng the point. It is NOT believable for Lesnar to lose to the Undertaker, it just isn't.. the thing is Lesnar's been booked to such an unstoppable point that its not believable for ANYONE to beat him. As soon as he loses, he looks BEATABLE. Whoever beats him should be a younger star.. seeing that Lesnar's contract ends in 3 years, thats plenty of enough time to build up your next mega star. THe thing is Underatker should not receive the rub of bringing Lesnar back down to a beatable state, someone else should. Hell ill even take CENA over taker. what can't you understand about this? I mean this is simple 5th grader shit. You clearly don't know shit about wrestling
Okay listen to this.. Brock Lesnar's powerful booking can be compared to Goldberg's streak.. once GOldberg's streak was broken, he was still seen as a very strong competitor, just not THE best anymore.. ok maybe thats a bad example because Brock Lesnar is booked WAYYYYYY stronger than Goldberg, but hopefully you get my point. I shouldn't have to even explain this shit to you
Spidey Revivey
Porn is okay here long as it ain't dudes.
Lesnar isn't undefeated. A 3 year winning streak is the worst idea for modern wrestling I've ever heard. You compared a defeated Lesnar to Sandow. You look stupid. Go stand in the corner.
Spidey Revivey
Porn is okay here long as it ain't dudes.
Shiiiit now that I think about it, when was the last time a streak was broken by some young up and comer? I can only think of established names breaking streaks- the smartest business move really.
How is it the smartes business move?
You're embarassing yourself. Just leave
hate when people like you defend the WWE's stupidity like you know the ins and outs of the industry..
yes Lesnar isn't undefeated, but he is treated as if he is. They don't mention his losses anymore, they are treating him as an unstoppable force just like Goldberg was on his streak. they probably realize that his losses to HHH and Cena were stupid so theyre making up for it
Spidey Revivey
Porn is okay here long as it ain't dudes.
How is it the smartes business move?
You're embarassing yourself. Just leave
hate when people like you defend the WWE's stupidity like you know the ins and outs of the industry..
yes Lesnar isn't undefeated, but he is treated as if he is. They don't mention his losses anymore, they are treating him as an unstoppable force just like Goldberg was on his streak. they probably realize that his losses to HHH and Cena were stupid so theyre making up for it
How is it not smart? You're practically calling Lesnar a god over said business move, tweedle dumbshit.
Couldn't answer my question, could you? Can you name one guy who was an up and comer who just so happened to break a winning streak? Or will you continue to circle jerk people here with your wrestling "knowledge"?
-Claims I pretend to know the ins and outs. Swears Lesnar will be a joke if Taker gets 1 win off of him.
-Thinks having an established star break a streak is a dumb business move. Swears a 3 year streak is smart.
Spidey Revivey
Porn is okay here long as it ain't dudes.
Lawd. I've been using my mobile and couldn't see rep points. Now that I'm on the Kindle boy do I feel silly arguing with someone clearly making circular arguments and had nothing to show for it. Get back to me when you stop sucking. Good day to you, sir.
So you don't give a shit about the future huh? You wanna give all the rubs to already established stars like a dumbass.. if you are a writer for the WWE then I fear for the future.. just because they choose to have established stars break streaks doesn't mean it is RIGHT. Go suck a dick WWE apologist
No, there are plenty more, but I didn't want to give a full rundown of his time as MITB briefcase holder and his time as WWE Champion. However, since you insist... let's do it.
The night after MITB, he beat RVD cleanly in a very good match. He would go on to beat RVD a few more times on television, in some great matches.
Beat Dean Ambrose at Summerslam in BY FAR the greatest Lumberjack match in history. He would also beat Ambrose the next night on Raw putting him out of commission. Now did he have help? Yes, but it doesn't matter since the matches were AWESOME. This is my problem with his reign as WWE Champion... he's booked to look so weak that he's hardly had any great matches (if any), whereas as the MITB briefcase holder he had them almost weekly. And putting on great matches is more important than anything.
Beat US Champion Sheamus on Raw a couple of weeks later.
Got clean wins over Swagger, Big E. and Kofi on TV multiple times.
Beat Ziggler on television 5 times throughout this run. Ziggler was IC Champ in a lot of those matches, and most matches were very good. You brought up the Survivor Series match, which yes, was indeed horrible for Rollins. I bitched at the time that Sting's return was ruined by the ******ed fact that Rollins was knocked out from the Zig-Zag for literally 5 minutes. But regardless, ultimately Rollins owned Ziggler when he was MITB briefcase holder.
Beat Orton on the November 3rd addition of Raw CLEANLY. More than he could do as Champion....
Lost to Cena in a TLC match at TLC. Very good, competitive match though, which again is more important than wins and losses.
Beat Cena the next night on Raw in a Steel Cage match. With a lot of help, yes, but a win regardless and still a damn good match, maybe even better than their match the night before.
Lost to Cena on the Christmas Raw... meaningless really, but another very good match. These two should be able to kill it at Summerslam unless Rollins is made to look like a pussy, which just proves my argument tenfold.
Beat Cena a couple of weeks later in a Lumberjack match. See how Rollins has losses here and there but picks up big wins on television while having great matches? As I will prove, this has not been the case since he became WWE Champion.
Royal Rumble vs. Cena & Lesnar.... already discussed. This was a match where Rollins may have lost, but he still came out the winner because of an epic performance.
Now, despite Rollins stealing the show at the Rumble, this is where it all takes a turn. After that, Rollins started losing to Bryan and Reigns a lot on television, and then became Orton's bitch. It's like they knew they were going to make him Champion at Wrestlemania so they wanted it to be as much of a shocker as possible, so they started to make Rollins look weak by losing a lot and being this huge coward towards Orton. This is probably what made you believe Rollins was a bigger chump throughout his MITB run than his WWE World Title run. But WWE's logic there at least made sense. There was a purpose to Rollins looking weak, a big pay off in the end. There has been no purpose for it throughout his WWE Title run, which let's look at right now.
Wait, before I get there, note that Rollins' matches with Bryan were fantastic and his matches with Reigns were also good.
Alright, so the night of Wrestlemania 31, Rollins lost cleanly to Orton. Again, this was done with the knowledge that Rollins was going to be champ at the end of the night, so they wanted to make it as shocking as possible. Once again, there's a PAY OFF to him looking weak.
Rollins lost his first match as WWE Champion on the following night on Raw in a six man tag match with Kane and Big Show vs. Roman Reigns, Randy Orton, and Ryback.
Rollins beat Neville the following week on Raw.... good win, good match there.
Got beat up by Kane the following week on Raw, when Kane then let an unconscious Rollins pin him.
Beat Ziggler the following week on Raw.
Extreme Rules - his first pay-per-view match as WWE World Champion. This steel cage match against Orton was AWFUL. Not only did Rollins look unbelievably weak, but the match itself just wasn't any good. Compare this to the Last Man Standing match against Ambrose, Rollins' first pay-per-view match as the MITB briefcase holder.... I mean, there just isn't any comparison. And it wasn't the fault of Rollins and Orton, both are very capable of putting on classics. But it was the booking that made this such a shitfest.
Now, look what happened after Extreme Rules leading up to Payback....
Lost to Randy Orton and Reigns in a tag match when he was teamed with Kane on Raw....
Lost to Ambrose on the Raw after that....
Got DQ'd against Orton in the Raw after that....
This is your WWE World World Champion.
Not only is he losing every week though, but the matches just aren't very good. And again, it's not the fault of the wrestlers, that's just how they're booked. I think as the MITB briefcase holder, Rollins had more say-so in his matches together with his opponents. But as champion, I think Vince and the agents are much more hands on when it comes his matches and it shows.Alright so at Payback Rollins won the Fatal Four Way in a match almost everyone agreed that it wasn't very good. And it was because of the constant interference by Kane on Rollins behalf.
Next Raw Rollins doesn't have a match, the following week he loses in a tag match with Kane against Reigns and Ambrose.
At Elimination Chamber Rollins got himself DQ'd in a match against Ambrose that wasn't even a fucking match. So another DUD pay-per-view match.
A week after that Rollins loses to J&J Security.... which, this I didn't mind as much as others did because at least this was some entertaining stuff (which is more important than anything else at the end of the day). But still, this is IC or US Champion material, not for the WWE World Champion to lose to a couple of scrubs in that manner.
Money in the Bank we went over... Rollins looked great in that match. And while the match wasn't as good as the LMS match at Summerslam or the match the night after Summerslam against Ambrose, it was still very good. So, after 3 pay-per-views as WWE World Champion, Rollins FINALLY has a good match, and a match where he actually looks like a champion.
And the only televised match Rollins has had since then was against Ambrose on Smackdown, which he won.
Which leads to where we are in this thread, Battleground 2015, which of course we've already covered. It's not just about Rollins looking weak, it's about him not looking like a champion. He did not look like a champion at Battleground. He didn't put up any kind of a fight except for a couple of leg and super kicks. It was just horribly, horribly booked, especially when you consider the event ended at 10:45PM ET. when they still could have added at least 10 more minutes to the match to let Rollins get more stuff in and make it a bit more competitive.
So please Holy, read over all that and again tell me that Rollins has looked stronger throughout his WWE World Title reign than he did as the MITB briefcase holder. And it's not about looking strong honestly.... it's about entertainment. Rollins was AWESOME as the MITB briefcase holder, had great matches constantly. As WWE World Champion though, it's been complete shit. There are morons who would fault Rollins for that, but it's clear as fucking day that it's been the booking.
The Holy One
What's really good?
I sincerely appreciate your thoroughness of analyzing Rollins' career path (not many people would go this far). I see the only difference in his booking has been how the made him look on TV shows. As PPVs are concerned, he still looks like someone who can't do it on his on. That's held true from MITB last year to MITB this year. Once again, nothing wrong with that, I've always believe the best heels are those who think shouldn't win but use every trick to do it and then brag about it afterwards. Now if they want to start booking him against mid-card talent on TV then go ahead as that would be refreshing from what they normally do with the WHC. I still feel, however, that Seth in major matches hasn't change one bit.
And I would never fault Seth for that, he's been one of the best things each show. He continues to be a pleasant surprise from what we all thought the Shield would turn out to be when they broke up.
And I would never fault Seth for that, he's been one of the best things each show. He continues to be a pleasant surprise from what we all thought the Shield would turn out to be when they broke up.