Championship Region, Fifth Round: (1) John Cena vs. (2) Ric Flair

Discussion in 'Championship Region' started by klunderbunker, Apr 17, 2013.

?

Who wins this match?

  1. John Cena

  2. Ric Flair

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    Ok, WrestleMania 26 and 27. No Rock, no Lesnar, Punk wasn't really a big deal... He was still drawing numbers way, way, way above what Flair was in the 80s.
    But does not the exact same thing not apply to Hogan, who was routinely drawing 10-15 times the audiences Flair did. If Flair was great, that wouldn't have happened.

    You see, often its hard to compare eras in terms of drawing because of the overall popularity of wrestling having peaks and troughs. But in the 80s, thanks to Hogan, we know it was possible to draw a large wrestling audience. We don't know what the limit of capability of today is, maybe Cena's not reaching it, but regardless Cena wrestling now, in a trough of wrestling popularity is massively outdrawing Ric Flair who peaked at a peak of wrestling popularity.

    More people watch Raw now than ever watched anything Flair did when there was less televisual choice in the 80s, more people buy WWE PPVs, more people buy WWE merchandise, more people go to WWE shows, more people are aware of him outside of wrestling. How in the world is he not a bigger draw than Ric Flair. When Cena is and isn't on Raw the ratings have a 0.5 swing. When Flair was and wasn't on Clash of the Champions, exactly the same number of people tuned in.

    Kayfabe wise, however, Cena would probably go over because he's the type of performer that Flair put over all of the time.[/QUOTE]

    No edition of Starrcade drew more than 17,000 fans. No WrestleMania headlined by John Cena has ever drawn less.

    In what world is drawing 23,000 fans to an arena that holds 24,000 "almost drawing 50,000 fans"?

    John Cena beat Darren Young on Raw on 18th March. The crowd was almost three times that which saw Sting beat Flair at Starrcade 1989.

    Are you too stupid to understand how supply and demand works? When Ric Flair lost his title to Ricky Steamboat at Clash of the Champions VI, the audience was less than half that tuned in to see the Saturday Night Main Event card three weeks previously

    How many retirement matches has John Cena ever lost? None.
    How many has Ric Flair lost? Two.

    That's as high stakes as it gets.

    I'm not getting into the Vader argument, again, but no, he wasn't at all dominant in 1993. Hogan and Savage have pinned him far more times, and big deal, he beat Carlito. He also lost to Shelton Benjamin. Cool.

    I don't really like Cena, but you would have to be either a fan boy or a complete and utter moron to not see that he is objectively a better wrestler than Ric Flair. He makes more money, draws more crowds and sells more merchandise - the only objective markers. It really is that simple.
     
    #51
  2. FitFinlay4Life

    FitFinlay4Life What's the craic?

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,908
    Likes Received:
    708
    Not necessarily, the formats of the two matches were different so what's to say that HBK might not have one the 'more important match' had he been allowed the longer format?

    No, he has had 2 hour long bouts with guys who are also unused to it and is 1:1. NOT the same as going against someone who specialized in this exact thing.

    And yet you have voted for Sammartino and Andre (two more guys who specialized in hour long matches) against Santo and Triple H?

    And an example of HBK making someone submit is?

    Erm, I was addressing your assessment that Cena learns by his mistakes... yet he has been surprised time after time after time after time by people turning on him, kind of refuting that claim.

    So falling through a table against Sheamus wasn't a mistake? What about breaking his signature submission hold to stop someone who was going to award him the match anyway? Trying the signature of his opponent rather than sticking to the tried and tested?

    Well actually, this was my post but you left it in and I still like it, so I thought I'd keep it.;)

    This was Hogan operating in full on Flair mode (and dominating the WCW World Title) and he was shown who was truly the dirtiest player in the game.

    So a win over a guy who specializes inside a cage should be discounted?

    Flair defeated the Undertaker in a no DQ match in 2002.

    Are you seriously suggesting that it'd be easier to beat Triple H in a steel cage?

    I could be smart and say Torrie Wilson:lmao:, but I'll reverse that and say how many of the top guys has he also lost too... do I even need to start that list?

    And Flair is the greatest heel EVER and always found the way to overcome.

    So you admit that Flair winning is logical booking then (thanks for conceding that point) but booking's irrelevant? How is booking "irrelevant", Cena might be the third greatest face (and that's highly subjective) but Flair is, without a doubt, the greatest heel ever. Why would he not get rolled up? Because that doesn't happen anymore? In this tournament, what was allowed to happen in the past would be allowed to happen here and you want to know something? Cena mightn't tap to the Figure Four but sustained time in the hold could very well weaken Cena's legs for that extra split second that would give Naitch the 1-2-3.

    Actually, you shouldn't have saved me the trouble - it was a standard one on one that ended in a double countout before the Rock restarted it and Cena lost.

    As far as the match dynamic was concerned, Punk was running out with the WWe and Cena's ball, he'd made his alleged face turn by blindsiding John and insulted him repeatedly - if Cena wasn't treating him like a heel, then, again, that calls into question his intelligence.

    And none of Cena's opponents have been a prime Flair... and yet again, why'd you vote for Bruno and Andre again?

    He wouldn't need to escape the corner, he was well adapt at fighting out of it.


    Deem, amigo. The stats you provided are all well and good but, with the possible exception of Savage (who he has a winning record against), the other guys had a very distinct prime advantage. Asides from that, as I explained before, Flair was never scared to lose via dq or countout as long as he retained his belt. It was when the chips were down that he proved his legendary status and won.

    Let me put it this way:
    Ric Flair: Sep 17, 81 - Jun 10, 83
    Harley Race: Jun 10, 83 - Nov 24, 83
    Ric Flair: Nov 24, 83 - May 06, 84
    Kerry Von Erich: May 06, 84 - May 24, 84
    Ric Flair: May 24, 84 - Jul 26, 86
    Dusty Rhodes: Jul 26, 86 - Aug 09, 86
    Ric Flair: Aug 09, 86 - Sep 25, 87
    Ron Garvin: Sep 25, 87 - Nov 26, 87
    Ric Flair: Nov 26, 87 - Feb 20, 89
    Ricky Steamboat: Feb 20, 89 - May 07, 89
    Ric Flair: May 07, 89 - Jul 07, 90
    Sting: Jul 07, 90 - Jan 11, 91
    Ric Flair: Jan 11, 91 - Sep 08, 91

    ... or, to put it a different way, beating the man and staying the man are two completely different things and notice how not one of these guys won the belt back from Naitch (that's what I call learning from mistakes)! Now someone tell me the John Cena title stretch that compares to holding the title for 3118 days out of 3643?

    To quote the great Stan Lee - "Nuff said!"
     
    #52
  3. shattered dreams

    shattered dreams Hexagonal Hedonist

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    975
    So I assume you believe the new CEO of Apple is objectively better than Steve Jobs? One of the more ridiculous things that is done in this tournament is to reward other wrestlers for coming after the true greats, Hogan, Austin, maybe Rock. To suggest Cena took the industry from the levels it was in Flair's time to the levels it was at in the 2000s entirely by himself is the only thing I see as utterly moronic. Ratings are down in WWE and have been for some time. Same for non-WM PPVs. Why we should ignore that just because they are still high because others worked to build a strong audience in the past is beyond me. The idea that Cena is solely responsible for the advantage of 20 years of Wrestlemania marketing is also absurd. What has Cena added to what was there when he started? But but it isn't Cena's fault! Fuck that cop out, it is probably partially true but if you are going to give him credit for everything context independent, then you punish him for everything context independent. Same old shit, all successes are the wrestler, all failures are someone that isn't an active wrestler. Fuck that nonsense. If this tournament is about making money, why isn't Vince even in it?
     
    #53
    Steamboat Ricky likes this.
  4. SSJPhenom

    SSJPhenom The Phenom of WZ

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    399
    WrestleMania 26 had the Career vs Streak match as the headliner. So to say that Cena was the main draw for that Mania is ridiculous. Also, no Rock for WrestleMania 27? He may not have wrestled, but it'd be idiotic to say that he had nothing to do with drawing for that event.

    I'd say that yes after '85 Hogan was definitely drawing more than Flair, however, in the late 70's and early 80's, there wasn't a larger draw in wrestling than Ric Flair. Even after '85 and the first WrestleMania, Flair and the NWA was on par with the WWE until about '88. Didn't the first Clash of the Champions do like an 8.5 rating or something like that? Which was unheard of at that time.

    Still though, in today's era there are several stars that people tune in to see. The way some of you make it sound is that Cena is the only reason to tune in and watch Raw or to buy a ticket and watch Raw. 'Taker is wrestling on Raw this coming Monday. Are you going to tell me that, although 'Taker is wrestling this Monday, that the crowd is only there to see Cena and that the people that will watch it live are watching only to see Cena?

    In the 80's, there weren't has many stars for people to get behind. So when Flair went from territory to territory to over seas to defend his title, people came to see HIM. Whether they came to see their hometown boy beat him or whether they just came to finally see him wrestle; they came to see him.

    The same can't be said for Cena in today's time. There are several stars that the people come to see every week and since the beginning for the year this has been very true. We've had the Rock, CM Punk, HHH, Lesnar, and 'Taker all making appearences and just like every year around this time, the ratings have gone up. Now when all that ceases and Cena is all that is left, I guarantee that the ratings will go back down. Especially with Punk being out.

    And Cena is not the reason that more people watch Raw then anything Flair did. Raw's success, even today, can be traced back to Austin and the Rock.
     
    #54
    shattered dreams likes this.
  5. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    Up to and including the first two years of Cena's main event career, Wrestlemania was being held in arenas for years. That includes the Austin and Rock time. When Ultimate Warrior and Savage were champion, the figures from Hogan's days at the top stayed fairly level, when Flair and Hart came along in 1992, they started to decline.

    Drawing is the only objective criteria you can use. You can bring kayfabe or whatever in, though I don't see how that helps Flair. The majority, myself not included, would say Flair had the better matches and if that's what you want to vote on, go ahead, but the fact is he lost many of his classics.
     
    #55
  6. shattered dreams

    shattered dreams Hexagonal Hedonist

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    975
    Cena is the sole reason Wrestlemania isn't in arenas anymore:confused::wtf:
    BULLSHIT! BULLSHIT! BULLSHIT!

    At least you finally stumbled towards something I might agree with. Cena is more on a Bret Hart level than people realize. Why? Because no one wants to admit something they spend this much time on isn't at its peak.

    To call apples to apples numbers comparisons that occurred 30 years apart objective is an interesting choice of words. You aren't comparing wrestlers, you are comparing eras and promotions with cherry-picked faux ignorance to boot.

    Wasn't there a report last year that the McMahon's had lost half a billion dollars in the decline of WWE stock just since 2010. My god what a money maker that Cena is.
     
    #56
  7. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    What is it then? Because the other main eventers since WrestleMania 23 were there before the arena switch - Undertaker, Michaels, HHH, The Rock etc. etc. Batista and Edge weren't consistently prominent, and everyone else wasn't there before. If it wasn't Cena, who was it?

    The WWE was losing fans long before Cena even debuted in the company. Personally, I think he stopped the rot, but hasn't built more fans. When he's not there, and the best example of this is the late 2008 ratings, when he was injured, the Raw rating went down 0.5. Flair has never had such an effect on the ratings needle.

    I'm not doing that though, am I? I've consistently said, Flair, as a potential of what you could draw in the late 80s didn't draw. This is proven by the fact that more people watched WWF shows headlined by the Red Rooster than watched Ric Flair in world title fights.

    The fact is simple. When Cena didn't appear on TV in late 2008, the ratings were on average 0.5 points lower. Given the ratings at this point were rarely above 4.0, it means Cena was directly responsible for 12.5% of the WWE's audience at that point. 12.5% of the WWE's audience in 2008 is more than 100% of WCW's audience in 1988. We know that big numbers were possible in 1988 because Hulk Hogan, Brutus 'The Barber' Beefcake and The Brooklyn Brawler were pulling them in to Saturday Night's Main Event.

    It is plausible that Cena isn't near the possible 'ratings ceiling' of today, but there's no megastar to categorically prove it. However, the fact that The Rock, Brock Lesnar, Triple H and Undertaker have all been draws in richer periods, and are present now, would suggest the ceiling isn't much above where it is now.

    WWE profits have increased during this period. Share price is utterly irrelevant, because it relies on the value of the company. Cena isn't a permanent commodity and would not be treated as such by the markets. It's the same reason football clubs get bought and sold for far less than the cumulative transfer value of their players.
     
    #57
  8. SSJPhenom

    SSJPhenom The Phenom of WZ

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    399
    Wasn't WrestleMania 17-19 in stadiums? We went back to arenas for 20-22 and have been in stadiums from 23-now.

    Cena definitely didn't have anything to do with 17-19 and lets look at 23-now shall we? Cena headlined 23, 27, 28, and 29. That leaves 24, 25, and 26. 3 in a row that Cena was not the main event of.

    So while I'll never say that Cena isn't a draw, however, I think it's ridiculous to say that Cena is the sole reason why WrestleMania is now held in stadiums. It was the natural progression of the event.
     
    #58
  9. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    The main event at WrestleMania isn't just the last match, it's the matches that are heavily advertised and billed before hand. Cena vs Batista, Cena vs Edge vs Big Show and Cena vs Orton vs Triple H were all certainly that.

    I didn't say he was the sole reason, but as the main draw of the company, he's going to play a huge part. Going back to my previous post, it has been shown that in 2008 at least he was responsible for 12.5% of the WWE audience. That equates to roughly 9,000 people at WrestleMania 24 to see him. Even if Flair was responsible for 100% of the Starrcade audience, which is obviously nonsense when people like Sting and Dusty Rhodes were on the card plus the people who'll watch it no matter what, Cena has outdrawn him.
     
    #59
  10. SSJPhenom

    SSJPhenom The Phenom of WZ

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    399
    I agree that the main event of WrestleMania isn't exactly the last match. To your point, however, 'Taker vs Edge, Orton vs HHH, and 'Taker vs Shawn were just as heavily advertised and billed. 'Taker vs Shawn was definitely the main event of WM 26.

    I just think that it's hard to compare the two eras and the two wrestlers. It was a different time then, however, to suggest that Flair was anything less than a top draw is ridiculous. Also, Starrcade was not the NWA's only event of the year. Flair went all over the world as NWA champion and he drew sell out crowds.
     
    #60
  11. shattered dreams

    shattered dreams Hexagonal Hedonist

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,522
    Likes Received:
    975
    I really hope Tasty is trolling at this point. Otherwise why make up such convoluted "arguments" in a match that was decided before it even started?

    I am torn between simply ignoring this ridiculousness and moving on or pointing out the obvious that it was all of these people and many more over the years. Also, obviously wrestlers are not the same level of draw every year of their career. Someone like Undertaker has increased his WM drawing power significantly.

    He may have briefly stopped the downward trend but then it started again. Not sure why that would constitute him being a grand draw.

    Furthermore, you basically cherry picked a worst case example and then are lambasting Flair for only being 10% of Hulkamania while you are celebrating your questionable notion that Cena was 12.5% of a down period of wrestling. If it is that close and you have clearly stacked the deck in your favor then it sure seems like Flair is at worst on Cena's level as a draw.

    In 2008 Cena got injured and the ratings while he was out averaged 3.0 when rounded to the nearest tenth. The average for the year was 3.3, that was the rating the week before Cena was out, the week before that it was 3.1 though. I don't see where you get 0.5 from or 12.5%. Seems more like 0.3 and 9% to me. But the bullshit doesn't even end there. The WWE has always had ratings trends that vary throughout the year. The next year during the same 3 month period the ratings would drop 0.2 below the yearly average. Same trend in 2010. Cena was there both times. Seems like it would not have been unreasonable to expect a 3.1 average during that 2008 time period even with Cena. Woo Hoo! Cena's presence effected the rating by a whole tenth! To be fair the ratings did go up some in 2009 while they were comparable in 2008 and 2010. Then again we are still talking about the 9% at best before adjusting for yearly trends.

    When Cena was injured in what people would likely still try and call his kayfabe prime the WWE did a 4.1 in December without him for an anniversary show. That was 0.5 above the average that year or about 14%. The only time the WWE has beat that rating since is the commercial free Donald Trump RAW.

    There's a shocker, negative business has "nothing" to with a wrestler that is the face of the business :rolleyes: Are you attempting to argue that the stock price fell off a cliff because people are worried what is going to happen to WWE when Cena is gone and has nothing to do with the current state of the product? :lmao: Interesting. I am fairly sure this is false anyway. WWE lost a lot of money on the films division and I have a hard time believing Cena's shortcomings as a draw have nothing to do with that. Yep, looks like WWE did 53.4 million in profit in 2010, 24.8 mil in 2011 and 31.4 mil in 2012.
     
    #61
    Mustang Sally and Papa Pillman like this.
  12. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    Because you keep coming back with nonsense? It's amusing. I really don't care if Cena wins or not, and if the scoreline was reversed I wouldn't bother posting to try and garner votes. I just think it's amusing that you think you're making a good argument, and every time you post Cena's lead increases. Nobody has even made an argument for Flair in any of the posts I've responded to, it's all about how shit Cena is, apparently.


    That's true, but WrestleMania sells out far before anyone knows what the matches are, and that has to be on the strength of the biggest wrestlers on the card. Cena, being the focal point, is obviously the biggest wrestling reason people tune in. Those others contribute. The Undertaker is more of a draw for PPV buys at Mania, I would think, because he's generally not around when the tickets are sold, but that's irrelevant.



    A bigger draw than Flair in the WWF though, who only saw a downturn of fortunes - no plateau.

    Only if you assume that 100% of the NWA audience was there for Flair, which it wasn't.

    The point is, fewer people like wrestling now than did in the 80s or 90s. You can tell this because wrestlers who were big then, like Sting and The Rock don't draw anywhere near as much now.

    I worked out the 0.5 thing years ago, and I can't remember how I achieved it. It'll be in my posting history somewhere. Even if Cena is a mere 9% of the audience, 9% of the WrestleMania audience while Cena has been on top is more than 100% of the audience for Flair's height at Starrcade.

    For a special show advertised ages in advance. When he was there at Raw 1000, it was the WWE's best ever three hour rating. Best. Ever.

    No, I'm not arguing that at all, I'm arguing that the wrestlers there will have little to do with how much the company is valued at, which is why WCW was sold for far less than the value of the contracts of the wrestlers still contracted. It's very common in sports teams.

    The stock goes down if they lose money. The wrestling side of the business, which Cena is partly responsible for, has made more money year on year. The films side loses money. The films that Cena is in make money, on the whole.

    Cena has had 3 theatrical releases with WWE Studios.

    The Marine cost $22 million, made $25 million at the box office and $30 million in DVD sales. (Running Cena film profit - $33 million)

    12 Rounds cost $20 million, made $18 million at the Box Office and $8 million in DVD sales (Running Cena profit $39 million).

    Legendary has no reliable figures, but given it was announced as a low budget drama film, it won't have cost more than $10 million. It tanked at the Box Office, only getting $200,000 on limited release. Regardless, Cena still has made well over $25 million for WWE studios in cinematic release.

    I'm not saying this has any relevance to this match, as I don't think it does, but to blame Cena for the failures of WWE Studios is a complete and utter joke.
     
    #62
    Mighty NorCal likes this.
  13. Big Nick Dudley

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    1,380
    I want to vote for Flair, seeing I believe he's definitely the superior wrestler, but I don't think Cena would lose this match.

    Cena, in my mind, loses to every other major babyface star of the past 30 or so years - Hogan, Warrior, Austin and Rocky. I think he's been made into a big enough babyface to withstand whatever someone like Flair has to throw at him (outside interference, cheating, etc).

    I'm still not a fan of most of what Cena has to offer, but like it or not, he's a big deal. So is Flair, but he's a heel. When you get to Cena's level of babyface, heels don't beat you, not on a stage like this.

    Unfortunately, once again, I'm voting for Cena.
     
    #63
  14. LSN80

    LSN80 King Of The Ring

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    2,608
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    I'm not sure how it's relevant. He lost to Cena, period. The match didn't have the chance to go longer because he was too busy tapping out.

    And if it was an Ironman match or such, why wouldn't HBK have still been in the same predicament at the same time?

    Shawn never wrestled an Ironman match before? I remember him winning a title that way, and tying Angle in another.

    And the fact that Flair had to go that long so often is a testament to his inability to put opponents away. Cena hasn't had that problem, has he?

    Because of the matchups, not their ability to wrestle long matches. And I'm not sure how this is relevant to a kayfabe match between Cena and Flair. Do his opponents have Cena's cardio, or his star power? No.
    That has nothing to do with my point. His leg was picked apart, HBK's strategy for much of the match, and Cena made him tap. You said essentially that Cena has never faced someone who has attempted to work over a limb extensively. HBK did. He failed.

    And since Cena wouldn't tap anyways, Flair can work his legs for 20 minutes to set up the Figure Four, and it wouldn't matter.

    1. Cena actually told AJ NOT to come out for his match. Is it his fault she did to thwart Vickie's interference. Again, not a mistake by Cena.

    2. He told Show "I got this". He didn't ask for his help. I'm not sure what his mistake was here, Show turned heel. That wasn't Cena's decision.


    Actually, he was pushed through a table off the turnbuckle.

    Wanting to win the match clean.

    Unless Vince and JL come out and try to have the bell rung when Cena has Flair in the middle of the ring, ready to tap.

    And like when Sting made Falir tap on Nitro in '96, maybe Cena would keep the hold on a minute or so following after all the failed cheap shots by Slick Ric during the course of the match.



    That was the mistake I was discussing.

    This was Hogan operating in full on Flair mode (and dominating the WCW World Title) and he was shown who was truly the dirtiest player in the game.

    Both men specialized in matches inside a cage. Part of my argument for
    Flair > Punk was that Flair is a cage specialist, and beat HHH in his prime when Flair was past his inside a cage. I always give a wrestler credit when credit is due.

    But with regards to this match, you have to discount that cage match. Because this isn't that kind of match.

    So to answer your question definitively, yes.


    Flair defeated the Undertaker in a no DQ match in 2002.

    I re-read my post and said nothing of the sort. What I was saying is that this isn't a steel cage match, it's a standard one-on-one match. A different animal altogether.

    And Cena has beaten HHH inside a steel cage. At Elimination Chamber 2010,
    he and HHH were the last two left. And he made HHH tap out.

    Not that HHH is truly relevant here.


    Re-read my first post and you'll see that I already made a list of many of the men Cena has lost to. What you'll also find is that they were in gimmick matches, which again, this is not. Outside of undetected interference, gimmick matches(not relevant here) and a handful of losses otherwise(Punk, Batista at Summerslam 2008, HHH at NOC 2008), Cena is virtually unbeatable in one-on-one matches.

    Can the same be said for Flair?

    Always is a pretty outlandish statement seeing how he lost his World Championship 16 times, saved it many times by DQ, and lost numerous non-title matches on Nitro and in WWF.

    And I'd argue Ted DiBiase Sr. is the greatest heel ever, but that's another argument for another day.



    My post never said anything of the sort. Cena winning is logical booking, actually, because he's the better man. Flair's arsenal wouldn't put Cena down, as he's not going to tap, lose to a chop block or brass knucks, so I'm not sure how that's "logical booking. I never said anything of the sort.

    I was saying that your interpretation of booking 101 is irrelevant, because it is. It's who would logically beat who in this matchup. And that would be Cena.

    Any ranking system is subjective.


    That's a subjective opinion. Personally, I think there have been better.

    Because Cena's history in big matches shows that he doesn't get rolled up and pinned. Got any examples?

    He wouldn't. His I Quit matches against both Miz and Orton, where he's sustained far more punishment then a figure four can provide, show that.

    Except you're discounting Cena's power. Cena doesn't spend significant time in any submission hold, because he powers out or to the ropes. Hence, he wouldn't get rolled up.

    Did Cena lose a one-on-one match to Miz, or was it no DQ, no Countout? ;)


    [YOUTUBE]5OfSR68tEzs
    [/YOUTUBE]

    I'll save you the trouble: I know it was his hometown. But I'll be darned if that wasn't the largest crowd reaction I've ever heard in favor of a wrestler in my 30 years on this earth.

    Punk's motivation doesn't matter: He wrestled like a face. And yes, he beat Cena. I never said Cena won 100% of his one on one matches. But to suggest Punk was a heel here simply isn't realism.

    Exactly. Which he can't do here, or Cena advances.

    Think of it this way. Despite that fact hat he lost many a time via DQ or count-out, often in big matches, he still lost the title 16 times.

    How many more times(or had shorter title reigns) do you think he would have lost titles had he not done so?

    Cena's biggest losses, for the most part, have been gimmick matches. This is a straight-up, one on one affair. No Horseman interference. No Flair walking out. He's got to face Cena one-on-one, gimmick free.

    This is Cena's match to lose, and in this type of match, he rarely does. The odds go down when facing a heel. Flair's done here.
     
    #64
  15. Vega

    Vega ^______^

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    170
    Just a short addition to the "Cena is a draw" argument:

    From Benoit's world title win (March 2004) until his death (June 2007) RAWs with Cena coming in as champion (90 RAWs) averaged at a 3.82 rating, without him at 3.79 (82).
    Post-Benoit up until the shift to three hours (July 2012) RAWs with Cena coming in as champion averaged at a 3.31 rating (66), without him at 3.32 (198).

    Doesn't seem like he pushes the needle that much.
     
    #65
    shattered dreams likes this.
  16. FitFinlay4Life

    FitFinlay4Life What's the craic?

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,908
    Likes Received:
    708
    HBK had a small number of Iron Man matches, that doesn't make him a specialist. Flair was a specialist.

    A strategy that wasn't HBK's normal method, probably why he failed. It was Flair's normal strategy - NOT the same thing.

    Look at Randy Orton, he is continually distrustful (probably because he has done his fair share of sneak attacks). Cena never seems to think that people will betray him, experience would tell him the opposite but he still gets betrayed. That is the opposite of learning from his mistakes.

    Really, looked to me like he lost his balance and even if he was pushed, just how smart was it to leave himself in that position at a time when he was dominating the Celtic Warrior?

    How'd that work out for him?

    Never said he'd have Ric in that position, just that it was dumb to break his signature move.

    You not think that '96 is past Ric's prime?

    Again, like the match with Sheamus and the match with Punk, he put himself in a position that cost him the match then.

    No, you don't discount a match just because of the former stip otherwise we'll have to discount nearly every one of Cenas because, as I explained before, he is always in stip matches to try and make it look like he is facing a disadvantage that he'll have to overcome.

    You brought him up!

    You wanted to discount Flair's victory over Trip's in a steel cage, an animal that should have suited the younger man. If you really want to talk different animals, you example here is a multiperson match.

    If you want to take away gimmick match evidence, you are disadvantaging John much more than Ric because he has a far higher percentage of them.

    Plus, take the MitB cash ins, they are standard one on one bouts - if I'm meant to discount the gimmick match that went before, then that weakens Cena's case.

    And virtually unbeatable? His loss to Punk and his Mania loses to Rock and Miz were standard one on ones.

    I wouldn't be daft enough to make such a stupid claim.

    You've brought up reading previous posts you made, check my last one and I think I'm quite specific about Ric's prime so I think it is testament to how good Naitch was that he was still winning World belts as he approached and past his half century in the biggest company in the World at that time.

    :lmao: Riiiiiiiight! :lmao:

    It's not interpretation, it is an actual science - in the WWe the heel is always meant to have the advantage going into a big match so that the crowd naturally falls in behind the face against the odds. However, in the NWA they worked it the opposite way to give the crowd the feeling that Flair would get his comeuppance only for Ric to overcome anyway. Here the face seemingly has the upper hand... sound familiar? Cena's reigns sound impressive but holding the World Belt, continually facing new contenders all over the planet for 3118 days out of 3643 - tell me who the better man is again?

    Hulk Hogan was the face of Wrestling's first great boom period, Steve Austin was the face of the second... we haven't had a third. I think that puts both above John... then throw in names like Thesz, Sammartino and the Rock (and that's before you even consider legends that dominated other countries for decades). I don't think I'm being too uncomplimentary to suggest that Cena might be the third biggest face in history.

    No heel has been World Champion for anything like the amount of time Flair has. No WRESTLER has held the title as many times. No one has ever been inducted into the WWe HoF twice except Flair. I think there is quite strong evidence that Flair is the greatest ever heel.

    Because roll ups don't occur to the top guys these days. In the '80s it was commonplace, surely you agree that (as such) it should be given the same respect as any other finishing maneuver?

    I'm not discounting anything, I'm merely saying that the roll up should be given the respect it used to have as a finish and that the Figure Four would be a logical reason for diminishing the leg power that would be required to escape.

    The match ended in a double count out man, check if you don't believe me.

    Punk cost Cena a match to a heel and then informed him that he was going to take his belt and leave the company. He then took advantage of Cena being distracted to win the match, that's a hell specialty - taking advantage of a distraction.

    He only got himself defeated when it didn't hurt him, that's why he was such a good heel. John's lost his World Titles 12 times in the 8 years, do you know how many times Flair lost his in the eight years after his first World Title victory? 5

    Significant advantage Flair if you're using that argument.

    Objection, conjuncture! ;)

    Who says there'll be no interference? It's only cheating if you get caught and rules do be stretched in big matches. Plus, I've said it before, the majority of Cena's matches are gimmick - give me plenty of evidence that he can go toe to toe against a guy whose prime had far less of these.

    Where is your evidence of Cena's great record on straight one on ones? TLC (and all derivatives), all types of Cage matches, all types of no dq match... when does Cena fight straight matches against top guys?
     
    #66

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"