Championship Region, Fifth Round: (1) John Cena vs. (11) Daniel Bryan

[Big Sexy]

Edge beat him at SSlam 06

Umaga pinned him on Raw

RVD pinned him at ONS 2006

Shawn Micheals pinned him in London

Great Khali pinned him at Saturday Night's Main Event in 2007

Cena has a history of losing to big, dominant names of the time.

Everyone was talking about his losses to big name faces. Edge, Umaga, and Khali were all heels. RVD only pinned him because of interference from Edge. The only clean loss to a face is HBK but that was after Cena already beat him clean at Mania 23.

Cena also has a long history of beating every big name that has been in the WWE over the last decade. 2005-2007 Cena > then any year for Daniel Bryan's career. A few great months does not make you an all time great. Chris Benoit had a few great months back in 2004 and proceeded to go back to being a mid carder.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

With Cena there have been alternates propped that have beaten Cena to see if they sink or swim once they get that big win. D Bry moved onto a major storyline post his win.

The thing with Cena is we are still in his prime because his run has been one of a kind. For 10 years he has been the man but people have popped up who can take the mantle of the traditional much beloved babyface. D Bry was a hopeful, his injury didnt really let us see where it goes but he was the guy for his run.

So these guys have faced each other in their primes, and Cena lost clean

I've been saying something from the start and I have yet for anybody to actually answer this.

Why is Bryan's prime when he beat Cena clean but not when Cena beat Bryan clean? Bryan supporters tend to leave that little factoid out. Bryan was in a better position when Cena beat him than the other way around. Bryan was feuding with Punk over the WWE Title before Cena beat him. Bryan was in a comedy tag team when he beat Cena.

So how can anyone say that Bryan beat Cena when both were in their prime and not say the same when Cena beat Bryan?

 

[SSJPhenom]

Has to be John Cena doesn't it? I mean, he's been the face of the WWE for the last decade plus and is one of the greatest of all time. Daniel Bryan could never beat him, BUT HE HAS!

Not only did D-Bry beat Cena, he beat him at the second biggest show of the year and beat him for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. Also, let's not forget the most important fact, D-Bry beat him clean,1-2-3 in the middle of the ring. Folks, you can argue all day long that Cena is the bigger star and blah blah blah. Fact is, that's all true, however, D-Bry is well on his way to becoming the biggest face in the WWE. The story has definitely not yet been written for D-Bry. I'd even say that over the past year or so, D-Bry has edged Cena out as the undisputed number one face. It wasn't Cena who beat Triple H and then went on the beat Orton and Batista at WrestleMania 30. I think this match has to go to Daniel Bryan.

Vote D-Bry.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

I voted for Daniel Bryan not because he's the bigger star or had the biggest impact on this industry, but because when these two fought in their prime, Daniel Bryan defeated John Cena 100% clean in the ring. If and when the rematch happens and Cena pulls back out another 'w', then I will be intrigued to see the situation unfold, but until that day, I have to go with Bryan and I consider myself a fairly big fan of Cena's work.

 

[Kris Benwa]

It's so telling when Bryan supporters have NO other arguments besides one match. Just ignore the fact Cena has had more great matches, was easily a bigger draw, was easily a bigger superstar and has defeated Bryan in several matches...it's all about one match where Bryan won a title he couldn't keep for more than five minutes.

John Cena is a better wrestler, better on the mic, has had more great matches, has drawn WAAAY more money and was a bigger superstar and did it much longer than Bryan. This match should be a squash.
So all the times Daniel Bryan lost to Cena should be ignored because "it wasn't his prime", but apparently when Cena lost a match to Bryan it was Cena's prime?

Yeah, NO problems with logic there at all.



I could be wrong, but it REALLY looks like you're trying to argue Bryan wins this match because he could win the next two matches. Please tell me you have better logic than this. Because, if this is indeed your argument, it's one of the stupidest I've ever seen in the WZ Tournament. And that's saying something in a tournament where a wrestler lost because he never painted his shed.

Not over Cena in his prime.

The Daniel Bryan arguments have already started in full force ridiculousness. John Cena has numerous victories over Daniel Bryan, but we ignore all of them because of ONE match after Cena has begun stepping out of the major spotlight.

Complete and total lack of logic being displayed thus far by Bryan supporters. Which isn't surprising since there really isn't a lot of valid arguments to be made for Bryan.
One match after Cena had already begun stepping down in stature. Upsets happen, but it does mean the underdog is the better man/team.

For example, if Duke and Lehigh were to play a game of basketball tomorrow, would you give the advantage to Lehigh? I doubt it.

Everything you said here is exactly correct. It's humorous how much value some people are putting in one match, as if that erases the enormous difference between the greatness achieved by Cena compared to Bryan.

Only if you ignore the other matches they have.

Logic is not strong in this thread from Bryan supporters.

This is easily one of the greatest posts I've ever read on here. I almost shed a tear. This is John Cena 3-0 bodybag. His resume really speaks for itself. It's one I'd put up against just about anybody and I think it outdoes Bryan's by miles. Also LOL @ giving Bryan the vote because of one match where Cena was injured. Also considering their record is 4-4-1 and I don't remember Cena beating Bryan while Bryan was in need of surgery take that away and John has the edge. Cena wins in every category that I've seen considered here and I'm not really seeing an argument otherwise. Not sure how this even close. John Cena gets my vote CLEARLY, NO DEBATING

 

[MCMG]

Sure Bryan won at Summerslam but we can argue that was a fluke. Or at least that Cena was off his game. Sure, Bryan has defeated Triple H and Orton/Batista but the former was way past his prime and with Batista far from his too.

Bryan's other big match experience has seen him lose to Sheamus in 18 seconds and several losses to Punk. Before Bryan hit is peak? Fair enough but that doesn't explain his clean losses to both Reigns and Wyatt. Both inexperienced singles superstars. I think I'm right in saying that was Reigns' second singles match on PPV and Wyatt's third.

Cena on the other hand wins the big matches. He defeated Wyatt just three months later. He defeated an undefeated Rusev not even a month ago. Plus wins on the big stage against JBL, HHH, Michaels, Angle, Rock, Punk, Orton, Batista, Edge, Jericho, Lesnar - the list goes on.

Cena has certainly lost his fair share of matches but he always wins the war. Indeed, he has a far more impressive record in big matches too. Of course Cena wins.

 

[Slyfox696]

I've been saying something from the start and I have yet for anybody to actually answer this.

Why is Bryan's prime when he beat Cena clean but not when Cena beat Bryan clean? Bryan supporters tend to leave that little factoid out. Bryan was in a better position when Cena beat him than the other way around. Bryan was feuding with Punk over the WWE Title before Cena beat him. Bryan was in a comedy tag team when he beat Cena.

So how can anyone say that Bryan beat Cena when both were in their prime and not say the same when Cena beat Bryan?

For the same reason they ignore the fact Cena was injured in the match against Bryan.

It's really simple. The Daniel Bryan supporters have ZERO arguments in his favor. They just like him more so they use one match, while ignoring all other matches and the fact Cena was injured, to make their point. They also ignore the fact that Cena is the far bigger superstar, has had far more great matches, has drawn far more money and is one of the top 5 wrestlers of all time.

The Daniel Bryan supporters don't care about the facts, they just want to do what they like, regardless of how idiotic it may be.

Not only did D-Bry beat Cena, he beat him at the second biggest show of the year and beat him for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. Also, let's not forget the most important fact, D-Bry beat him clean,1-2-3 in the middle of the ring.

Yes, and this is what John Cena's tricep looked like before the match:

[/QUOTE]

I voted for Daniel Bryan not because he's the bigger star or had the biggest impact on this industry, but because when these two fought in their prime, Daniel Bryan defeated John Cena 100% clean in the ring.

That was not really Cena's prime AND he had a torn tricep. Hardly the clean victory you make it out to be.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

That was not really Cena's prime AND he had a torn tricep. Hardly the clean victory you make it out to be.

The prime thing is interesting because I'm really unsure as to when Cena had his prime. I think it's in the past for sure. I feel most would suggest that the 2005-2007 period where he utterly dominated was his prime but I see 2009-2013 as his best years in terms of being on top and consistently cementing himself as the be all and end all in wrestling. In fact I consider his prime to be ended by that very injury.

I also would point out that the torn tricep barely featured in the match. There was a very brief interaction with it at the start and then Cena himself dismissed the injury at the beginning of the match and it went on to have no bearing in the contest. It was as clean a victory as you could have asked for.

I just feel these two men have had one massive match where they were in the main event of the second biggest PPV of the year and Bryan walked out with the win in the match therefore under somewhat similar circumstances we'd have a similar result.

 

[Slyfox696]

The prime thing is interesting because I'm really unsure as to when Cena had his prime. I think it's in the past for sure. I feel most would suggest that the 2005-2007 period where he utterly dominated was his prime but I see 2009-2013 as his best years in terms of being on top and consistently cementing himself as the be all and end all in wrestling.

They are both correct, just in different ways. From roughly 2005 until his injury in 2007 where he had to vacate the title, Cena was (in kayfabe) essentially untouchable. In kayfabe terms, I would consider that the very best John Cena we've ever seen.

In realistic terms, I think John Cena has continued to get better and better and better, even as, in the last couple of years, he's been elevated beyond the title and is now used to help the company in every way.

But most of the Daniel Bryan arguments are being made in kayfabe and, in kayfabe, Daniel Bryan did not beat a prime John Cena.

I also would point out that the torn tricep barely featured in the match.

It's a torn tricep. It would (again, in kayfabe) hamper everything Cena does, including the force put into his offense.

If you're arguing in kayfabe, then Daniel Bryan's only point is that he beat an injured John Cena long after Cena's most dominating run. If you're arguing real life, then Bryan doesn't even come close.

There's really no comparison here, Cena is simply far beyond Daniel Bryan in every way.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

This match is tied this far in? Even the most staunch Daniel Bryan defenders should know that he shouldn't be winning this match, there is just absolutely no reason he should. I understand Cena lost to Bryan for the title clean at Summerslam but it's not like Cena hasn't beaten Bryan before either. It's also important to mention Cena had a pretty bad injury going into the Daniel Bryan match so he was going to lose that match regardless, it's a pretty bad example to use a match where Cena had no choice but to lose.

With that said here's the facts, John Cena has been WWE's top guy for 10 years, is excellent on the mic, has the ability to make every fan care about him (for bad or good), has been the top guy before AND after Daniel Bryan's time on top and despite what others argue he's actually a great wrestler. Daniel Bryan might be a better technician but I wouldn't call him a better overall wrestler than John Cena. The truth is Daniel Bryan can lay claim to every one of those points I made as well but he wasn't able to do those things as long as Cena and he wasn't able to do those things nearly to the effect Cena did them. Although Bryan is a great wrestler John Cena is simply greater and shouldn't have any problems disposing of Bryan.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Amazingly John Cena and Daniel Bryan have had just three televised one on one matches and the first one was a try out bout for the, then, Bryan Danielson way back in 2003. Of the other two, we have Cena beating Bryan as a precursor to Cena / Punk / Big Show three way at SummerSlam 2012 and Bryan defeating Cena for the WWe WHC at Summerslam 2013.

Cena's physical condition and prime have been used as reasons why we should discount this defeat.

In kayfabe, Cena quashes the first himself because he tells us himself that it wasn't the reason why he lost - he was simply beaten by the better man. We have to take him at his word if we're operating in kayfabe plus he has overcome similar obstacles many many times over the years (he doesn't get the 'SuperCena' tag for nothing). Plus the kayfabe severity of the injury has to be taken into account and the 4-6 months he mentioned have to be asterixed when you consider he was not only back but winning the WHC against ADR (a guy whose finishing move targeted said injury) at HiaC in half the low side estimate... AND he then defeated Damian Sandow's MitB cash in attempt the following night dispite a prolonged attack on said elbow prior to the cash in.

As for prime? The attached link shows us John Cena's win loss record over the years - if you take 2005 as beginning of his prime and take it right up today, his win record has varied from 73.6% to 95.1% over this period. Can you guess which year he had the 95.1% record? 2013 - a year in which he was defeating Ziggler, Punk, winning the Rumble, the Rock (at Mania), Ryback, ADR and Mark Henry. Anyway, how can anyone claim this isn't his kayfabe prime when said match was for the number one belt in the company (which he was holding) and when he would win the WHC AND the Undisputed WHC within a year of losing to Bryan?
http://www.cagematch.net/?id=2&nr=691&page=22&type=byYear


So Daniel Bryan beat John Cena in easily the biggest of their three meetings when the World Title was on the line at the no.2 PPV. John Cena himself has stated that there is no reason to have any questioning of his defeat and his win percentage would actually indicate that this was his strongest period between the ropes.

I'm giving Daniel my vote and I feel no guilt in doing so.

 

[Slyfox696]

I'm giving Daniel my vote and I feel no guilt in doing so.

Of course not, because people can always find a way to rationalize something they know isn't true, if they want it badly enough.

The fact of the matter is you (meaning Bryan supporters) STILL have no argument aside from one match after Cena's prime in which Cena had a torn tricep muscle. That's your entire argument. You can't argue number of great matches, you can't argue number of championships, you can't argue drawing ability or mic ability. Daniel Bryan has NOTHING on John Cena, except one kayfabe match out of nine. Your entire argument hinges around 11% of the matches between Cena and Bryan, where Cena was not in his prime and injured.

The Daniel Bryan argument is incredibly weak. The only reason this match is so close is because Daniel Bryan fans don't care about the best person winning the match, they just want their guy to win no matter how ridiculous it is.

John Cena is the better wrestler. John Cena is the bigger draw. John Cena is better on the mic. John Cena has had more great matches. John Cena has beaten Daniel Bryan 4 times. John Cena is greater than Daniel Bryan in nearly every way.

John Cena deserves to win this match. You know it, I know it and everyone knows it.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Of course not, because people can always find a way to rationalize something they know isn't true, if they want it badly enough.

The fact of the matter is you (meaning Bryan supporters) STILL have no argument aside from one match after Cena's prime in which Cena had a torn tricep muscle. That's your entire argument. You can't argue number of great matches, you can't argue number of championships, you can't argue drawing ability or mic ability. Daniel Bryan has NOTHING on John Cena, except one kayfabe match out of nine. Your entire argument hinges around 11% of the matches between Cena and Bryan, where Cena was not in his prime and injured.

The Daniel Bryan argument is incredibly weak. The only reason this match is so close is because Daniel Bryan fans don't care about the best person winning the match, they just want their guy to win no matter how ridiculous it is.

John Cena is the better wrestler. John Cena is the bigger draw. John Cena is better on the mic. John Cena has had more great matches. John Cena has beaten Daniel Bryan 4 times. John Cena is greater than Daniel Bryan in nearly every way.

John Cena deserves to win this match. You know it, I know it and everyone knows it.

This is a kayfabe tournament. One can use drawin power as a tool to make his choice or they can take in real life matches. You have clearly chosen drawing power.

You have also mentioned how that ONE match is in Cena's prime that is very true, people harping how 2005-2008 was the prime, well Cena's prime has been 10 year long and is a marvel.

BUT Bryan beat a Cena clean; Punk didnt do that at MiTB, Bryan did. Bryan beat a prime Cena when Bryan was hot. Bryan deserves to win because he HAS beaten a prime Cena and that decides for me. That in his short lived prime, Bryan beat Cena. And Cena loses in kayfabe matches in the ring.

I am not equating drawing power because this isn't Rolling Stone's Top 5 Most Influential Wrestlers or anything.

This is a kayfabe match And Bryan has beaten Cena

 

[Cereal Killer]

Cena's physical condition and prime have been used as reasons why we should discount this defeat.

That's right. An arm he had surgery on and his age certainly played a factor. When you get older, you slow down. If your tricep is torn, it's harder to wrestle.

In kayfabe, Cena quashes the first himself because he tells us himself that it wasn't the reason why he lost - he was simply beaten by the better man. We have to take him at his word if we're operating in kayfabe plus he has overcome similar obstacles many many times over the years (he doesn't get the 'SuperCena' tag for nothing).

Like I said before, Cena is a "good guy." He's not going to be making excuses about torn triceps on national television now, is he?

not only back but winning the WHC against ADR (a guy whose finishing move targeted said injury) at HiaC in half the low side estimate...

Yeah, because this was after the surgery. An arm after treatment is usually an arm better than before treatment.

AND he then defeated Damian Sandow's MitB cash in attempt the following night dispite a prolonged attack on said elbow prior to the cash in.

My friend, there is a big difference between a mid carder and a number one contender for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship who has main evented Wrestlemania.

As for prime? The attached link shows us John Cena's win loss record over the years - if you take 2005 as beginning of his prime and take it right up today, his win record has varied from 73.6% to 95.1% over this period. Can you guess which year he had the 95.1% record? 2013 - a year in which he was defeating Ziggler, Punk, winning the Rumble, the Rock (at Mania), Ryback, ADR and Mark Henry. Anyway, how can anyone claim this isn't his kayfabe prime when said match was for the number one belt in the company (which he was holding) and when he would win the WHC AND the Undisputed WHC within a year of losing to Bryan?
http://www.cagematch.net/?id=2&nr=691&page=22&type=byYear

Again, apples and oranges. His opponents in his prime included Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton, Batista, Chris Jericho and other multiple time world champions. The Rock waaaaay out of his prime and CM Punk are fair arguments but you can hardly compare victories over Ryback, Del Rio, Mark Henry and Dolph Ziggler (who beat Bryan clean on RAW recently) to the first set of names I had mentioned.

I'm giving Daniel my vote and I feel no guilt in doing so.

Are you sure about that? What other arguments are there for Bryan other than he beat an out of prime, injured Cena? Are you also forgetting he lost clean to Reigns, Wyatt and Ziggler?

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Of course not, because people can always find a way to rationalize something they know isn't true, if they want it badly enough.

Rationalize? I'm using facts and statistics on a kayfabe basis.

The fact of the matter is you (meaning Bryan supporters) STILL have no argument aside from one match after Cena's prime in which Cena had a torn tricep muscle.

That John Cena says did not affect the outcome of the match (and he has overcome similar disadvantages throughout his career as highlighted when he was winning the WHC belt and defending it despite ADR and Sandow concentrating completely on this debilitating weakness that, by John's own reckoning, was nowhere near rehabilitated).

That's your entire argument. You can't argue number of great matches,

That is very subjective, John Cena is the most pushed guy in the World's biggest promotion. Personally I find both guys incredibly entertaining in-ring with my only (slight) peev about John being ring psychology going out the window every once in a while.

you can't argue number of championships, you can't argue drawing ability or mic ability.

Not trying to argue any of those things, but can you honestly say that fans wouldn't get behind Bryan if the promotion got behind him? Mania XXX was a great financial success after all.

Daniel Bryan has NOTHING on John Cena, except one kayfabe match out of nine. Your entire argument hinges around 11% of the matches between Cena and Bryan, where Cena was not in his prime and injured.

Love to know just where you are getting your statistics but both Cagematch and Wrestlingdata only list three bouts and one of those is the Bryan Danielson tryout in 2003, hardly either guys prime. I also can't understand how you can term a year with a 95.1% win rate, a Royal Rumble win, defeating one of the greats in the Rock at WrestleMania and coming back to overcome insurmountable odds (again) against ADR to win the WHC in his second comeback match and then again overcame more long odds to be the first World Champion to overcome an opportunist MitB cash in. Again, why can't you accept Cena's own word that the elbow didn't influence how the bout... or at least why he wasn't able to overcome a setback that he majorly downplayed himself when his whole career has been set around overcoming insurmountable odds.

The Daniel Bryan argument is incredibly weak. The only reason this match is so close is because Daniel Bryan fans don't care about the best person winning the match, they just want their guy to win no matter how ridiculous it is.

My argument is simple, D-Bry has met John Cena ONCE in a major consequences match... and he won. I disagree that a guy who had such a run up to SummerSlam prior to losing to Bryan and goes on to win win two World Championships within a year of said loss can ever be termed as not being 'prime'.

John Cena is the better wrestler. John Cena is the bigger draw. John Cena is better on the mic. John Cena has had more great matches. John Cena has beaten Daniel Bryan 4 times. John Cena is greater than Daniel Bryan in nearly every way.

Display the source of the losses and (provided they're admissible in kayfabe) I'll happily rescind my kayfabe support of Daniel Bryan. Here are mine:
http://www.cagematch.net/?id=112&view=search&sParticipant1=John+Cena&sParticipant2=Daniel+Bryan&sParticipant3=&sParticipant4=&sEventName=&sEventType=&sDateFromDay=01&sDateFromMonth=01&sDateFromYear=2003&sDateTillDay=31&sDateTillMonth=12&sDateTillYear=2015&sPromotion=&sLocation=&sArena=&sRegion=&sMatchType=&sConstellation=Singles&sWorkerRelationship=Opponents&sFulltextSearch=
http://wrestlingdata.com/index.php?befehl=konst&letter1=D&wrestler1=81335&letter2=J&wrestler2=1237&letter3=&wrestler3=0&letter4=&wrestler4=0&anzeige=matches&matchtyp=1

John Cena deserves to win this match. You know it, I know it and everyone knows it.

Depends purely on the criteria. John Cena from winning his first WHC has never been one to make excuses and deliberately points out that he had no excuse for his loss against D-Bry. I'm taking him at his word... are you not?

 

[Nate DaMac]

BUT Bryan beat a Cena clean; Punk didnt do that at MiTB, Bryan did.

Uh, Bryan's win over Cena was no more clean than Punk's. Cena was absolutely protected in defeat both times.

 

[Tastycles]

Look, I like Bryan and I think his route to the title probably makes him better or as good as half of the people left in this tournament. Alas, Cena is not one of them. Slyfox has laid the arguments in as much detail as they need to be made, but ask yourself in all honesty - you own a wrestling promotion and you're given the choice of Cena in 2005 or Bryan in 2013-14 to lead your promotion. Who would you sign? If your answer isn't Cena, you'll never get it. Vote Cena.

 

[ghost94]

I saw how John Cena battled CM Punk for a number 1 contender's spot on Monday Night Raw, pulling out a Hurricanrana, he can bring it and surprise you. Cena all the way on this one.

 

[nightmare]

Vote how you want. Cena deserves his respect & that is coming from someone who used to despise him. If he is more your cup of tea, it is a vote well deserved, but saying that a vote for Bryan is unjustified or has no valid reasoning- that is just absurd.


Support of Bryan is justified based not only on the fact of his big win for the #1 belt in the #1 promotion in the world, but also because he has a few other factors in his favor that seem to be discounted. Factors which we recognize wrestlers for in other matches, but somehow because its Bryan vs SuperCena, people are dismissing.


The guy has wrestled all over the damn world & gained numerous title wins in minor as well as major promotions. Bryan has been recognized for being one of, if not the most solid technical wrestlers in the past decade & has a damn job in WWE based off of that success\talent. He came in with a supportive fan base & gained an even bigger following by being great in the ring and charismatic in his own way. You cannot discount the huge reaction he has gotten or say that it isnt well deserved. WWE took a chance on a very talented guy who was not homegrown in Vince's garden & he ran with his chances, making the most out of them and eventually becoming the hottest thing in wrestling. So insanely popular that it created one of the best WM moments ever.



Cena deserves all his credit for essentially starting Hulkamania 2.0, but he isnt invincible. Cena usually overcomes the odds, but sometimes he comes up short. He can lose & he has lost to this man. A man with accolades and talent to back it up. Jesus, it isnt like we are talking about some jobber or flash in the pan rookie here. If we take in to account big matches\title wins & career accomplishments in other tournament matches, why should we not do the same here? Because "LOL CENAWINS" ?


Well, not this time he doesn't....

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Vote how you want. Cena deserves his respect & that is coming from someone who used to despise him. If he is more your cup of tea, it is a vote well deserved, but saying that a vote for Bryan is unjustified or has no valid reasoning- that is just absurd.


Support of Bryan is justified based not only on the fact of his big win for the #1 belt in the #1 promotion in the world, but also because he has a few other factors in his favor that seem to be discounted. Factors which we recognize wrestlers for in other matches, but somehow because its Bryan vs SuperCena, people are dismissing.

This should be good.

The guy has wrestled all over the damn world & gained numerous title wins in minor as well as major promotions.

Not Cena's fault he's only been in one major promotion and has been more sucessful than Bryan has in any promotion.

Bryan has been recognized for being one of, if not the most solid technical wrestlers in the past decade & has a damn job in WWE based off of that success\talent.

William Regal is a solid technical wrestler. Doesn't mean I'm picking him over Cena.

He came in with a supportive fan base & gained an even bigger following by being great in the ring and charismatic in his own way. You cannot discount the huge reaction he has gotten or say that it isnt well deserved.

Cena was close to being fired not even a year into his career. He was pretty damn over when he was a face in 2004 considering the tomato cans he was facing on a nightly basis.

WWE took a chance on a very talented guy who was not homegrown in Vince's garden & he ran with his chances, making the most out of them and eventually becoming the hottest thing in wrestling. So insanely popular that it created one of the best WM moments ever.

Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero had a great WM moment. How does this put Bryan over Cena?

Cena deserves all his credit for essentially starting Hulkamania 2.0, but he isnt invincible. Cena usually overcomes the odds, but sometimes he comes up short. He can lose & he has lost to this man

And Bryan can lose and has lost to Cena.

A man with accolades and talent to back it up. Jesus, it isnt like we are talking about some jobber or flash in the pan rookie here. If we take in to account big matches\title wins & career accomplishments in other tournament matches, why should we not do the same here? Because "LOL CENAWINS" ?

Wrestlemania 21, Wrestlemania 22, Wrestlemania 23, Wrestlemania 25, Wrestlemania 26, Wrestlemania 29

I could keep going but you wanted to take in to account big matches and title wins. Cena has that over Bryan in spades.

Well, not this time he doesn't....

I've seen no convincing arguments to that point.

 

[nightmare]

William Regal is a solid technical wrestler. Doesn't mean I'm picking him over Cena.

Well it didn't take long for someone to miss the point & throw up the name of a random wrestler...

Cena was close to being fired not even a year into his career. He was pretty damn over when he was a face in 2004 considering the tomato cans he was facing on a nightly basis.

Cool, how does that negate Bryan's popularity again? Just shows they were both able to gain a following & I still would give Bryan the point considering people dont boo the shit out of him when his theme hits.

Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero had a great WM moment. How does this put Bryan over Cena?

Hey, look! It's the "insert random wrestler name here" argument. Twice in one post? Is that supposed to make me forget that the point was to show Bryan has had a great career & should not be easily dismissed?

And Bryan can lose and has lost to Cena.

Beating Cena for the title, in what many consider match of the year, holds a bit more weight with me.

Wrestlemania 21, Wrestlemania 22, Wrestlemania 23, Wrestlemania 25, Wrestlemania 26, Wrestlemania 29

I could keep going but you wanted to take in to account big matches and title wins. Cena has that over Bryan in spades.

Hold on. (checks thread title) Yep. None of those were against his opponent here. This match is Cena vs Bryan & in terms of big match title wins- Cena lost to Bryan, but good job trying to diminish the point of my statement by deflection.

I've seen no convincing arguments to that point.

No-one was trying to convince you of anything. I stated if you like Cena, cast your vote. The point I made was showing Bryan has a valid claim here because some Cena supporters are quick to write him off like he doesnt mean shit.

 

[enviousdominous]

Let's backtrack all the way until we look at this from the perspective of an impartial booker.

Titansports exploded! All records of the WWE are incinerated and you, YES YOU, are tasked with booking either Daniel Bryan or John Cena to win an upcoming match.

From my perspective; you have John Cena who lived up to an immense amount of hype, and his likeability fizzled while he was still being promoted as the greatest "superstar" who ever lived. He's fought through injury and is a class act with his fanbase and haters alike, I take nothing from him as a pro-wrestler and a human being.

Then you have Daniel Bryan, a man who was perfectly content owning a career of mediocrity in that his humble nature beckoned him to make his opponents look better than they really were. The crowd demanded his presence at the top, in my opinion because he was being denied that place on the roster simply because of his physique. The fact that Daniel Bryan was even on the card at WrestleMania 30 proves that he had enough fans to change the course of the WWE's ever precious creative direction.

Daniel Bryan getting this far in even this tournament says something about the guy. John Cena could get a quick shot of ten votes and that'll be that, either way Daniel Bryan proved that nice guys don't always finish last.

My vote is for Daniel Bryan because he doesn't just give 110% in his performances, he gets that much out of every one of his opponents. Daniel Bryan entertains by putting on an amazing performance in the ring, John Cena entertains by wearing bright clothing and acting like a wigger.

 

[rbv13]

Damn, Bryan is pulling away. Hope everyone realizes a vote for Bryan automatically means you are in Isis.

This has been an entertaining back and forth. Sadly looks like time is running out for Johnny boy.

 

[JJYanks121]

I still don't understand how one prime is less than a year (oh, but ignore the clean loss to a midcard heel in the middle, that doesn't count), but the other prime is like a decade long. The former is already out of his prime? Perhaps so if injuries keep piling up and he's a midcard performer from here on in. The other guy always came back early from injuries and apparently never left his prime for years upon years upon years.

I'm simply piggybacking on everyone else's logic here or lack thereof. There's no argument to be made for Bryan's "prime" vs. Cena's prime. Bryan's is less than a year old where he lost to a midcard heel. Cena won the title the first time, only lost to a cash in after beating 5 other men, got the title right back, lost in a gimmick match, and then got it right back and held it for over a yeaer before an injury made him forfeit the title. There is zero chance you can find a period of time DB dominated that much. He never did. In fact, his entire rise is him losing but the fans not liking it.

Now, I like Daniel Bryan as much as the next guy. Seems like a good dude, fun to watch, all that. He's not anywhere close to being on a level with Cena though and the fact that this match is close is actually disturbing. Very hard to fathom that so many people are stuck on one match that maybe shouldn't have happened due to Cena's tennis ball sized elbow. That one "clean" victory is forcing the hand of voters and it shouldn't. Be smart and vote for the main eventer, not the midcarder. This shouldn't be difficult.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

This is un-fuckin'-believable.


Dudes, Bryan beat him one time, in one hotly contested match, after Cena was three surgeries past his prime of 06 - 08.

Daniel Bryan would be thankful to be in the SAME RING as prime John Cena, let alone having any sort of shot at him. John Cena exists at a level of dominance only Sammartino can compare to, in a time were Cena is exposed to the entire viewing audience ten times more than Bruno had to be.......and Bryan had a decent 6 month run. Cena was nearly undefeated for the better part of two years. There is a REASON he is booed by varying degrees of fans at live shows.


Don't be a fucking idiot. Vote Cena.