Daniel Bryan is bland.

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Sorry about the timing of this but I'm only just watching Smackdown as I speak.

My point is actually that I've not seen any evidence for the assertion in my title, but I've seen people saying it often. Least every time he's picked up a mic in the WWE it's been entertaining as his promo from Smackdown is now proving to me. So where does that stigma come from? I mean, I can't claim to be a long-time fan of his, only since he's been with his current employers. So has he developed character with time and he used to be more mundane or do I just find entertainment when other's are watching with grey-tinted glasses? Help me out here guyzzzzzz.

And more importantly, how long til someone comments on my title without reading the OP?

 

[Daniel]

As much as I love him, Daniel Bryan does have aspects of blandness. However, Bryan Danielson doesn't. Daniel Bryan just doesn't have as much freedom in WWE and it's hindering him slightly. But only slightly.

 

[Ming]

Nah I don't think so personally. At times, maybe he could show more emotion but I'd never go as far as to say he's bland.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Who had 12 minutes?

 

[Hyorinmaru]

me

 

[Coco]

He's bland because he's not the Rock, Steve Austin, DX, Undertaker, or any similar entity. Duh.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Loving the location Mr. Blood.

 

[Serious Jones]

literally infinite rep to the person that gets this

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Can you really make a guarantee like infinite rep? Are you buds with Sly? What's with all the questions? Why don't I come back in a less quizzical mood? Why not indeed? I'm afraid I don't get it.

 

[The Dragon Saga]

I made a comment about this in the Smackdown MVP thread Gaping Anus began. He isn't bland at all, he just wasn't given the chances, but when he is given the chances he always shows people up but you'll always have the idiots that will continue saying he's bland because they're... Idiots.

What I find funny is I've been watching Danielson since 2004 and I know well he isn't bland/boring, but still some people who only know him through WWE like to challenge me on it. Just give in, the dude has microphone skills, he has in-ring skills - there was always a reason for him being an IWC fan favorite. He wasn't just picked out of a random lottery.

By the way, the random lottery to pick the next IWC fanboy will be July 2nd. Candidates are Chuck Palumbo, Curt Hawkins, Mike Knox and Doink The Clown. We will have punch and pie.

 

[Mr. Truth]

literally infinite rep to the person that gets this

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

I made a comment about this in the Smackdown MVP thread Gaping Anus began. He isn't bland at all, he just wasn't given the chances, but when he is given the chances he always shows people up but you'll always have the idiots that will continue saying he's bland because they're... Idiots.

What I find funny is I've been watching Danielson since 2004 and I know well he isn't bland/boring, but still some people who only know him through WWE like to challenge me on it. Just give in, the dude has microphone skills, he has in-ring skills - there was always a reason for him being an IWC fan favorite. He wasn't just picked out of a random lottery.

By the way, the random lottery to pick the next IWC fanboy will be July 2nd. Candidates are Chuck Palumbo, Curt Hawkins, Mike Knox and Doink The Clown. We will have punch and pie.

As I had hoped. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.

And if pie is on the menu then I vote Doink. Anybody remember Doink? Doink was so underrated. The WWE could really do with a Doink character right now. Oh Doink, how we barely knew ye.

 

[Da Truth]

He's not totally bland but he could be better. I really liked his character on NXT and when he first came to Raw. His hands are tied like so many other performers. He should be a person tells you he's gonna break your and does it like when he first came. I think he'll be okay; look for him to get a bigger push next year or late this year.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Not being given much to do and being bland are not the same thing. How many goddamn times must this be established around here

 

[jmt225]

If Daniel Bryan is bland it's because WWE made him that way. Blame WWE, not the wrestler.

As we've seen with Zack Ryder, and I've been making this point for over the past 5 years now, if you go outside the box with WWE and try to do something original that wasn't thought up for you by them... it's looked down upon and considered going into business for yourself, and you will NEVER be pushed. That's why I laugh at WWE monkeys on the internet who always blame talented wrestlers for not getting over.

If CM Punk hadn't have the luxury of Paul Heyman being there when he got called up, he would have been flushed down the toilet and all the ******ed WWE fanboys would have used him as another example as to how he was "overrated" by indy fans.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

What I am now learning is that many people don't read OPs. Although I agree with what jmt says by it's own merit.

 

[Wade's Public Transit Bomb]

I don't know if I have ever been indifferent to a wrestler. He doesn't bother me nor does he make me take notice.


I just don't get why a lot of internet peoples line up to go "KILL!~~ FUCK YOU VINCE!! KILL! KILL!!! GODDAMMIT!! KILL VINCE FOR NOT PUSHING BRYAN DANIELSON!!! HE SHOULDN'T BEEN FIRED LAST YEAR!!!! OMGFG! HE DOESN'T KNOW TALENT!!! KILL!!!" whenever he isn't being booked *how he deserves* to be.

 

[shattered dreams]

What I am now learning is that many people don't read OPs. Although I agree with what jmt says by it's own merit.

Why do you keep saying this? Even if your OP expressed a sentiment opposite to the title the topic remains the same. People are just commenting on the Bryan and bland situation in whatever way they see fit.

He isn't bland at all, he just wasn't given the chances, but when he is given the chances he always shows people up but you'll always have the idiots that will continue saying he's bland because they're... Idiots.

Why are they idiots? You basically say that he has been bland in WWE even if you claim it isn't his fault. Why would someone that has only seen his work there be an idiot for giving an accurate assessment of his time in the company?

Not being given much to do and being bland are not the same thing. How many goddamn times must this be established around here

Finally someone talks some sense. Zach Ryder has not "been given a chance" but I doubt anyone is calling him bland. The two have nothing to do with each other. In fact, you could argue that they are opposites. Being entertaining ONLY under the right circumstances is basically saying that the person has a deficiency in that area, essentially admitting they are naturally bland.

I have no stake in this debate. I haven't seen enough of his work in WWE or elsewhere. I just know the most interesting thing he ever did in WWE was get fired for real. I do find it amusing that people hype up all he did on the indys as a case for him. If he was an exemplary talent I doubt they would have let him have all those years on the indys to begin with.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Why do you keep saying this? Even if your OP expressed a sentiment opposite to the title the topic remains the same. People are just commenting on the Bryan and bland situation in whatever way they see fit.

Well actually my title is a statement. 'Is Daniel Bryan bland?' is a topic. As my title was only a statement I did expect people to read the OP to help explain the title. Yet I have seen many people, none outright stating, but many implying that they read the title and took the opinion expressed within to be my own so they came in to offer their opinion on THAT.

Now, I realize an implication isn't much to go on and also that this is a spam zone. But within the OP I asked a certain question. Now either people ignored that and simply wanted to offer their opinion based on the keywords bland and Daniel Bryan or they didn't actually read it. As many of the responses seem to gel perfectly with the image of someone responding to the title alone, it isn't far fetched to assume that is what happened in some cases. I mean, I'm sure you see it all the time in the non-spams. Someone makes a thread with a given title, asks questions within their OP and many people respond to the title alone.

So to give you the short answer, because of my intuition.

I should be asleep. Stupid moth.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I thought he was doing a bland gimmick. Michael Cole has stated it frequently on commentary and Booker was calling him D. Bryan, to seemingly give him some charisma.