Do you think top stars should be pinned cleanly more often?

[hello]

In the last 5 years or so, I cant remember the last time Cena lost in a clean finish. Five years!!? Even when he loses the championship, he doesn't get pinned cleanly. Against Sheamus, he fell through a table (not put through the table by force, mind you). At the Fatal 4 way, Cena lost the title only after a lot of interference from Nexus. Against Edge in January 06, it took two spears AND a briefcase shot to the head, AFTER Cena competed in an elimination chamber match.


Even the top stars in boxing or UFC or even amateur wrestling lose once in awhile - and to have someone rarely, if ever, get pinned cleanly while having matches every week seems ridiculous. What do you guys think, should the top stars be pinned cleanly more often?

 

[Kaneanite]

I am the only person in the world that doesn't mind Cena's superhero gimmick. Although, it would be nice to show that he can lose from time to time instead of having him always win.

Though, I completely agree with you. It's so annoying to see un-clean finishes to matches. It's the most annoying thing in the world. The only one I've ever liked was Kane's debut to eat Undertaker. They are just so lame.

Sheamus is trying to be the next big heel and oh how he could be! But WWE is almost in a way burying any credibility he has by never winning a clean match. I don't think I want to see Faces lose legitly as badly as I want to see Heels win legitly.

 

[Ultra Awesome]

I don't really feel like disproving your theory of how Cena never looses a match cleanly...so, I'll just stick to the question...

In all honesty, it all depends in the situation. For example, If the point of the match (feud) is to elevate a rising star (i.e. future main-eventer), than it should only be natural that the top star the said person was competing against should loose cleanly. This in turn, allows the the rising star to gain some credibility, along with some mommentum. It elevates the young individual to one step further of being recognized as one of the best.

On the other hand, one of the best ways to gain heat for a top star is to cheat their way to victory; just as Sheamus, and many others before him have done. If you have two top stars fighting against each other in a match (feud), then it really doesn't matter how either of them will loose. Whether it be cleanly, or by cheating methods, the winner looses no credibility because he has already established himself as a top star before hand; making him have a decent enough credibility under his belt.

Therefore, I believe whether a top star looses cleanly or by cheating methods all depends on the type of feud and the type of match. Besides, in the very end, it is all pure entertainment...

 

[Dave]

I think having the “top guys” pinned cleanly more often would defeat the purpose of them being the “top guys”, wouldn’t it?

I mean, sure. People have commented that going over Cena or Triple H is damn near impossible but what harm is it doing to the product you are watching? Having people lose against these guys does nothing for anyone. Chalking up a loss against Cena or Triple H is just giving into the inevitable and that is that.

However, the great part of having the top stars be almost undefeatable is that when someone does go over those guys, you know that they are for real. Look at the people who have gone over Triple H, for instance. Batista, Randy Orton, Sheamus and John Cena are all mega-stars in the wrestling business now. I am not implying that a win against Triple H puts you on top of the mountain but it certainly puts you up there.

At the end of the day, there is a reason that these guys are the, so called, “top guys” and that is because they rarely lose. Keep it that way, I think.

 

[LSN80]

Let me correct a few things from the OP. One there was no briefcase shot to the head to Cena. I have the DVD, he hit Flair with it, not Cena. cena was busted open from the Eliminationm Chamber, and Edge laying in punches.

Two, you can't remember Cena losing cleanly in the pat 5 years? How about when HHH beat him in possibly his "last match" on Raw before his Iron Man Match at Bragging Rights 2009? What about Orton in Hell in A Cell 2009? How about when HHH beat him at NOC 2008? How about when Batista beat him, clean, at Summerslam 2007? If you dont want a bigger star example, JBL beat him in NYC parking lot at the Great American Bash, 2007? I know HHH and Batista are/were "top stars", but you said you couldnt remember him ever losing cleanly. JBL certainly wasn't anymore, if he ever was. I could think of more, but I figured Id just jog your memory a little bit.

Anyway, how are you to be considered a "top star" if you're losing "more often" in clean fashion? You brought up MMA, UFC, and amateur wrestling. That shit's real, last time I checked!

I think there comes a time, and you brought up a valid point, that if you want to make new stars, the top guys have to put them over. Cena has put Sheamus over to the extent that he's NEVER BEATEN HIM. You dont think that fact has helped get him over? I think his victories over Cena have been what has gotten Sheamus over as a heel. It doesn't matter that his victories have been somewhat tainted, the fact is, he's beaten him over and over again. If they want to make a top face, then yes. a top star needs to beat them. But to make a top heel, Id argue that by them "cheating to win" in big matches, it gets them over even more as a HEEL. So sure, if theyre serious about pushing Morrison, put him over a top guy(not your champ) clean. But the idea that top stars never get pinned or have to get pinned cleanly is rediculous.

Finally, why is thism directed just as Cena? Its just as much apart of his gimmick that it is The Undertaker's not to lose cleanly. Can you remember Taker losing clean other then to Kane last month at NOC in the last 5 years? That was even "excused" on Taker still being weak from his "vegetative state". You pick on Cena for being true to hios gimmick, which I personally like, while a guy like Taker NEVER loses cleanly, which I dont mind either. Its part of their gimmick man. Further, its what makes them "top stars" in the first place.

 

[mreastbay]

I never liked Superman. So the thought of invincability in a wrestler really has to make sense to me. Rather than focus on guys who get the push when answering this question, Im going to address it more as..............Isnt it the tops stars responsibility to help other guys shine, when they know they are on thier way up? And yes, it is. Otherwise there wouldnt be a business. Thats one of the reasons why guys like HBK, Chris Jericho, Terry Funk, *cough* Chris Benoit, Edge, and (at least during this WWE days) Kurt Angle were so respected. Cuz they knew losing wasnt the end of the world. Hell, they could still keep momentum, and top heel/face status, even if they do occassionally lose to the Kingstons, Punks, Up-and-COming Ortons, etc. The best way to get a crowd to believe in a guy is to have a big guy lose to them (Ex. HHH/Batista @ WM, or Bourne Pinning Edge in the tag match). So yes............i do think they should be pinned more often......especially when it seems like they never get pinned at all (Im Talking To You HHH!)

 

[mrbooker]

Let me correct a few things from the OP. One there was no briefcase shot to the head to Cena. I have the DVD, he hit Flair with it, not Cena. cena was busted open from the Eliminationm Chamber, and Edge laying in punches.

Two, you can't remember Cena losing cleanly in the pat 5 years? How about when HHH beat him in possibly his "last match" on Raw before his Iron Man Match at Bragging Rights 2009? What about Orton in Hell in A Cell 2009? How about when HHH beat him at NOC 2008? How about when Batista beat him, clean, at Summerslam 2007? If you dont want a bigger star example, JBL beat him in NYC parking lot at the Great American Bash, 2007? I know HHH and Batista are/were "top stars", but you said you couldnt remember him ever losing cleanly. JBL certainly wasn't anymore, if he ever was. I could think of more, but I figured Id just jog your memory a little bit.
.

Actuall orton didnt win cleanly he tapped out but the ref was knocked out then otron went on to win thats not losing clean. The batista win was hyped by cena being injured not even batistas victory hardly a clean win but lets let it slide. Batista, HHH, JBL, and HBK thats who has beaten cena clean the past 5 years. So yes getting pinned cleanly would be better! the product is so stale and predictable, 99% of the time they win or get screwed out of the match, and they wonder why their is a lack of top mainevent status heels for the future of WWE, Sheamus got over due to HHH not his B.S. wins over cena.

Yea heels cheat to win that part of being a heel, but their are different heels ones that are animals, ones that are masterminds, ones with resources etc... cena losing a match at the end of every quarter year would not hurt him that much. Thats what happens when you are super over you can lose and still not lose a head of steam. Before WWE/F gave that feeling on any given night one man could beat the other because the competition is so strong by having guys who only lose due to some outside reason it just makes the entire roster look SO WEAK. SO 90% of the roster wins some loses some but orton and cena rarely lose flat out. So the major faces of the company that are in the most important storylines rarely lose clean, thank you for making a stale product

 

[Calderownz]

To a certain extent, I agree with the thread starter. However, I also understand the current situation.

If you pin a top guy one too many times, it often times can hurt his character. If Cena were pinned cleanly three or four memorable times a year, he'd be looked at as a guy that's been jobbing recently. Something that WWE can't afford with a lack of TOP quality faces.

Also, it's a lot like the chair shot theory. The more chair shots you see, the less likely you are to feel impressed by them. During the "Attitude Era," we saw plenty of chair shots. Directly to the head. However, now, it either doesn't happen or it happens to the back of the wrestler. If you saw a direct chair-to-head shot, you'd actually say, "Wow, that was a nice shot." So, the "rarer" something is, the more it stands out.

Someone like John Cena, when he does get pinned cleanly, it will mean more. It'll help put someone over in a bigger way. Someone like Wade Barrett could benefit from something like that.

At the same time, in order for someone to pin him cleanly, they have to be built up the right way. No sense in letting the guy that all kids look up to get pinned cleanly, and then the guy that pins him doesn't get over.... not good for television.

Plus, heels generally cheat to win. That's what makes them heel. Randy Orton started winning a bit more cleanly and he turned face soon thereafter. So, things definitely have to be handled a certain way. You need heels and you need to do what you need to do to keep them that way.

If Barrett had pinned Cena cleanly at Hell In A Cell, the match would have ended in a dud. However, the way they did it, actually got people in the audience off guard. It was entertaining to watch. Most people expected Nexus to break up. The ratings didn't go over the top with Nexus and the PPV numbers were down, so many thought they would just disband. However, it was a bit "shocking" due to the fact that they added another layer to the angle. And that happened with the messy ending.

So, sometimes a clean pin doesn't have the biggest impact. But when someone like Cena gets pinned cleanly, it'll mean more.

 

[douce1973]

Once a wrestler gets to the "Main Event" position, it's my view that you must have clean finishes once and a while as to not lose the audience to predictability. However, these clean loses should only be at the hands of another qualified main event talent.

Example, of course, is the Cenamonster. Now, it's one thing if Johnny Muscles is up against Wade Barrett on Raw and loses - but there should be some shenanigans on Barrett's behalf to keep the appearance that SuperCena was robbed and could've beaten the the nipples off of Barrret in a clean match. This keeps the fans wanting to watch the PPV.

However, once the PPV arrives - where all of the good fans/marks/smarks/suckers have spent their money - the winner should be based on continuity and logic of storyline and not just about keeping everyone "strong". I mean, jesum crow all of the main eventers are supposed to be considered strong enough to take the title anyway, so why in the hell would anyone crap on Johnny Muscles for losing a match once and a while. If the WWE thinks all of Cena nation is just going to up and walk away from wrestling because of a clean loss, then they haven't done a truly good job establishing his loyal fan base, have they?

The utilization of shmozzz finishes/Dusty Finishes/ and the uberly overused run-ins and interferences should be contained to matchups between wrestlers with obvious event level disparity.

Example - Even Bourne scoring a suprise victory over Kane because the Undertaker interferes... blah, blah, blah. This justifies match unpredictability and also tests the waters for an undercard wrestler's popularity as well.

.... just a thought.

 

[CyDeez]

I have commented on probably 5 threads asking this or a similar question.

It makes sense why they do this. They want the Faces to appeal to people.

Also, it puts a Heel over as a Heel to "cheat" to beat that beloved BabyFace.

That Face is so "great" that a "bad guy" has to resort to underhanded tactics to defeat this guy that stands for all that is good. LOL

 

[LSN80]

Actuall orton didnt win cleanly he tapped out but the ref was knocked out then otron went on to win thats not losing clean. The batista win was hyped by cena being injured not even batistas victory hardly a clean win but lets let it slide. Batista, HHH, JBL, and HBK thats who has beaten cena clean the past 5 years. So yes getting pinned cleanly would be better! the product is so stale and predictable, 99% of the time they win or get screwed out of the match, and they wonder why their is a lack of top mainevent status heels for the future of WWE, Sheamus got over due to HHH not his B.S. wins over cena.

Yea heels cheat to win that part of being a heel, but their are different heels ones that are animals, ones that are masterminds, ones with resources etc... cena losing a match at the end of every quarter year would not hurt him that much. Thats what happens when you are super over you can lose and still not lose a head of steam. Before WWE/F gave that feeling on any given night one man could beat the other because the competition is so strong by having guys who only lose due to some outside reason it just makes the entire roster look SO WEAK. SO 90% of the roster wins some loses some but orton and cena rarely lose flat out. So the major faces of the company that are in the most important storylines rarely lose clean, thank you for making a stale product

Where in the Hell in a Cell Match did Cena cheat to win? He kicked out of the RKO, and Orton did the same from the FU. It took a punt to the head for Orton to win. I dont want to split hairs, but Mysterio didnt "win the title cleanly" at WM 22 then because both he and Orton tapped out behind the refs back.

And the argument that HHH made Sheamus is, well, far-fetched. Its what Sheamus holds his hat on, but he jumped him backstage before the match with a lead pipe! He gave him like 4 brogue kicks to beat him and take him out. Hes taken TWO titles from Cena, and his first win from Cena is what really got him over, not his feud with HHH. Title wins are ALWAYS a career maker over simply jumping someone and taking them out.

And there was no real injury angle with Batista. Cena went for the rocker dropper of the top rope and got Batista-bombed, thats a clean win. He beat Rhodes and DiBiase in an effin handicap match the next night! Thats where the argument could be made that top stars bury younger talent, because he shouldnt have won clean with a double FU the night after a war with Batista. But he still lost clean in all of those matches.

Anyway, I do agree that the product is stale. Cena joining Nexus is a "fresh angle" that is helping getting Barrett over, even if he didnt beat Cena clean. A win over the face of the company is still huge for anyone, clean or not.

 

[StunnaMan12]

I think that in the long run it wouldn't really matter that they didn't win clean.The fact that they won is the point.A lot of times most people just forget how they won.They just remember...they won.As time passes a lot of people are just going to remember Sheamus beat Cena for the title on his first try.Big freakin accomplishment right.

 

[dashing]

It's always been the case though for the top face to never lose. I believe Bret Hart went years without losing cleanly between Wreslemania X and WMXII; and after WMX Shawn Michaels didn't lose a match cleanly until Wrestlemania 14 against Austin which is amazing when put into perspective. Hogan went years without losing cleanly until his match with the Ultimate Warrior at WMVI. So yeah if anything top faces seem to lose a little more often now!

 

[michael.foulds]

IT's always been like that in WWE, they always try to keep the fans happy. If you go to WCW, they always had the heels win for some odd reason. One reason I think they went under (one of many reasons).

 

[Narsat]

I think some of the top stars should get pinned clean once in awhile...I remember when HBK pinned Cena clean in England...I thought he won the strap! I would like to see more clean finished in WWE, I think outside interference takes a lot away from the matches. One guy who I see a lot of potential in right now is Wade Barrett but I would take him a lot more seriously if he could beat somebody fair and square or at least he could have won that battle royal on his own to earn the title shot at Orton.

 

[deadtaker]

This isn't a new thing that the top guys don't get beat clean often especially if they are a babyface. You go back to the Hulk Hogan era in wwf and the only time I remember him losing cleanly was to another babyface The Ultimate Warrior at Wrestlemania 6. Stone Cold hardly ever lost clean during his days at the top often screwed by Vince to lose the title. In WCW you could count on 1 hand the number of matches Goldberg lost and none of them were clean. It is not a new thing that the top starts don't lose clean.

 

[MMK]

Yes. They should be pinned cleanly more often. Not too often, but more often than they currently are. At least in WWE's case.

Any match where your top guy is champion and the title is not on the line is a perfect scenario for that wrestler to be pinned cleanly.

The Summer Slam elimination match is a perfect example of a time when your top guy can be pinned cleanly. That's a match Cena could have, and should have, lost cleanly. He was outnumbered and their was no title on the line. He should have been pinned.

And of course on occasion, you have to show that your top guys are human. People can't relate to a person who's invincible. Flawed hero's are always far more interesting than flawless ones.

 

[GLOBAL ICON]

Yeah. Top guys need to be pinned cleanly more often. It gives a chance for the man pinning that top guy to gain the fans' respect and also a place in the ME scene. Plus, if that middle/low card guy has a great match with him, it takes all the credibility away from him. Just like what happened at HIAC. Barrett was in a war with Cena and then Cena losses on outside interference. I mean Barrett shud hav won that clean. Hell, that really took away credibility from him. Yeah, i agree. Top stars need to be pinned cleanly.

 

[Nada]

Anyone who says no to this topic, did not watch WCW and does not realise what went wrong

WCW top stars never lost, especially clean to anyone. When they rarely did lose, it was Hogan - Goldberg, basically made a wrestler into a superstar.

Where do you think Undertaker would be today had countless people not allowed him to walk all over them? He basically burst into the main event scene immediatly, where would Hunter be had Austin and Rock said "no im not jobbing to him"? Or if Mick Foley didnt put him over and make him look like a million dollars?

Where would Hogan be had Andre not let him beat him?


Losing cleanly is the best way to make new established stars, when i say stars im not talking about midcarders or upper midcarders, im talking about main event guys who sell out stadiums and make the WWE truckloads of money

Only 1 big star has been made, Cena. And he was allowed to go over alot of people, Brock Lesnar would have been a HUGE star and he got the sort of push that you need, today Lesnar is a bigger draw in UFC by sheer numbers than even Cena is in WWE.

Austin got over because he beat Taker several times, aswell as HBK. Imagine someone today going over Hunter and Undertaker in the same year...CLEAN and a new guy!?

The very thought is absurd, you cant make new stars if old ones dont want to work as a team, thats 101 wrestling logic, something WCW had no clue about and something WWE isent doing a good job with.

The Brock Lesnar push is how Undertaker himself was made, thats how you make people big, had Sheamus or Swagger gotten that kind of support they would be looking like a million dollars today