Does being the biggest draw equal to being the most entertaining? Nope

[Spidey Revivey]

Triple H was neither the face of the company or in his prime when losing to Bryan/Shield. A better example would have been Hulk Hogan, Stone Cold, or The Rock...people that didn't lose nearly as much as Cena does when they were in their prime.

 

[Crocker]

Triple H was neither the face of the company or in his prime when losing to Bryan/Shield. A better example would have been Hulk Hogan, Stone Cold, or The Rock...people that didn't lose nearly as much as Cena does when they were in their prime.

Cena isn't in his prime first of all. Hes 38 years old. When he was in his prime (30-33) he barely lost; only to the likes of HHH, HBK, Edge, Orton, people who were equal or had greater star power than him.

Second of all Cena was the face of the company way longer than Rock, Stone Cold, and Hogan were, so of course he would lose more than them.

 

[Bernkastel]

Trips is a part timer who works very few matches a year. Cena is a full time star. If you're including DQ's [which you should because a loss is a loss] Cena has lost more times this year alone than Trips did since becoming a part timer. The fans see Cena all the time. If he lost allot more then he already does his heat would most certainly dull. Like Kane or Big Show. Nobody takes them seriously anymore because they lose all the time. Cena can't lose 3 PPV's in a row and then not be active for half a year.

 

[Crocker]

Trips is a part timer who works very few matches a year. Cena is a full time star. If you're including DQ's [which you should because a loss is a loss] Cena has lost more times this year alone than Trips did since becoming a part timer. The fans see Cena all the time. If he lost allot more then he already does his heat would most certainly dull. Like Kane or Big Show. Nobody takes them seriously anymore because they lose all the time. Cena can't lose 3 PPV's in a row and then not be active for half a year.

If Reigns can take 3 losses in a row as a non-established star, then so can Cena.. hell I remember that Orton lost 5 ppvs in a row last year. Orton didn't even lose that much credibility even after those 5 losses.

Wrestlemania - lost to Daniel Bryan
Extreme Rules - lost to Shield
Payback - lost to Shield
Money in the Bank - lost in the MITB ladder match
SummerSlam - lost to Roman Reigns.

Besides, aren't you guys the same people who constantly tried to reassure that Dean Ambrose was fine, despite all of his shortcomings? And now youre saying that Cena can't take 3 PPV losses in a row. Fucking double standards and hypocrisy at its finest

 

[Spidey Revivey]

Cena isn't in his prime first of all. Hes 38 years old.

Your example was 46 year old Triple H. Comparatively, Cena is still in his prime.

When he was in his prime (30-33) he barely lost; only to the likes of HHH, HBK, Edge, Orton, people who were equal or had greater star power than him.

I would be pleasantly surprised if Hulk Hogan had been defeated by that many people 1 on 1 in his prime.

Second of all Cena was the face of the company way longer than Rock, Stone Cold, and Hogan were, so of course he would lose more than them.

Not really. Being around longer isn't exactly a good excuse for a flavor of the month to wreck him. The hype of somebody going over Cena would be lost. Guys like Daniel Bryan pinning him wouldn't matter in the long run if he was to lose more often.

 

[BringThePain834]

He is diagnosed with Cenaitis, which causes Cena hatred to prevail over common sense, which has caused him to break several of this forum's rules. Which then is accompanied by fits of rage over the SMALLEST stuff about Cena. Granting Make A Wish kids' wishes, going out to dinner, Cena backstage politicking people (which probably doesn't actually happen), etc. When he tried leaving the forum like many have been seen asking him to do, he only logged back in about a day later and spammed a big portion of this entire board in an effort to show his intellectual and emotional superiority to all of us. I have no faith in his ability to ever get out of this prison, I am sick and tired of him and the only thing he's got left going for him is the permanent banhammer.

Yes. Cenaitis is a disease that affects the brain, causing it to swell up not only whenever the topic comes up, but also whenever the name "John Cena" is even said by anyone, it doesn't even have to be brought up in a topic.

I stand correct here

 

[therockiswwf]

Stone Cold lost clean once in 1999.

That's how top faces work. They can't be like everyone else. If they lost like a normal guy, they wouldn't be special.

Cena is still having great matches and promos, so I would say he is still in his prime. He can only be replaced by a guy with a proven track record. You don't become a top guy overnight. It (usually) takes years.

 

[Bernkastel]

If Reigns can take 3 losses in a row as a non-established star, then so can Cena.. hell I remember that Orton lost 5 ppvs in a row last year. Orton didn't even lose that much credibility even after those 5 losses.

Wrestlemania - lost to Daniel Bryan
Extreme Rules - lost to Shield
Payback - lost to Shield
Money in the Bank - lost in the MITB ladder match
SummerSlam - lost to Roman Reigns.

Besides, aren't you guys the same people who constantly tried to reassure that Dean Ambrose was fine, despite all of his shortcomings? And now youre saying that Cena can't take 3 PPV losses in a row. Fucking double standards and hypocrisy at its finest

Yes, because Reigns and Cena are totally on the same level. Oh wait, they aren't

And last I checked Dean Ambrose is still an upper mid carder on the same level as Reigns and Wyatt.

 

[DetectiveZelix]

It's crazy how when it comes to Cena people are on polar opposite sides. Isn't that pathetic like why can't you guys meet somewhere in the middle. If you like him say you do and if you don't say you don't. I don't. he's boring, unentertaining, wrestling is subpar in my opinion. They push him because Vince wants to. period. Not the make a wish, not the money. Because Cena can have the same success as a heel and as second to the top but no one seems to believe this. People say Cena is so far above everyone else well if that's true then plain and simple it's because Vince refused to push anyone as high and long as he did with Cena and he probably never will. Of course drawing doesn't make you entertaining. It's all opinions here. Entertaining is based off everyone perspective. if the parents of the kids that love him buys his merch and keeps him on top is only a reflection of what entertains his fans.

Kids are like the only ones left that are truly entertained by any of the WWEs shit. There's other things that are for adults but the show is ultimately for the kids and that's why Cena is still on top. he's not interesting to me nor is he entertaining

 

[therockiswwf]

It's crazy how when it comes to Cena people are on polar opposite sides. Isn't that pathetic like why can't you guys meet somewhere in the middle. If you like him say you do and if you don't say you don't. I don't. he's boring, unentertaining, wrestling is subpar in my opinion. They push him because Vince wants to. period. Not the make a wish, not the money. Because Cena can have the same success as a heel and as second to the top but no one seems to believe this. People say Cena is so far above everyone else well if that's true then plain and simple it's because Vince refused to push anyone as high and long as he did with Cena and he probably never will. Of course drawing doesn't make you entertaining. It's all opinions here. Entertaining is based off everyone perspective. if the parents of the kids that love him buys his merch and keeps him on top is only a reflection of what entertains his fans.

Kids are like the only ones left that are truly entertained by any of the WWEs shit. There's other things that are for adults but the show is ultimately for the kids and that's why Cena is still on top. he's not interesting to me nor is he entertaining

You not liking him doesn't bother me (or really anyone). It's all subjective who you like, what entertains you, etc.

The whole reason Cena is pushed IS due to money. The WWE is a business. Cena is the top guy because he brings in the most money. That's it. Why would Vince intentionally do something that makes him lose money? That doesn't make sense.

A heel Cena would not make as much money as face Cena. Punk was mad that he had to turn heel for Rock. Why was he mad? He said that heels make significantly less in merch and other stuff. He had to basically take a pay cut by turning heel.

 

[A11oftheLights]

It's crazy how when it comes to Cena people are on polar opposite sides. Isn't that pathetic like why can't you guys meet somewhere in the middle. If you like him say you do and if you don't say you don't. I don't. he's boring, unentertaining, wrestling is subpar in my opinion. They push him because Vince wants to. period. Not the make a wish, not the money. Because Cena can have the same success as a heel and as second to the top but no one seems to believe this. People say Cena is so far above everyone else well if that's true then plain and simple it's because Vince refused to push anyone as high and long as he did with Cena and he probably never will. Of course drawing doesn't make you entertaining. It's all opinions here. Entertaining is based off everyone perspective. if the parents of the kids that love him buys his merch and keeps him on top is only a reflection of what entertains his fans.

Kids are like the only ones left that are truly entertained by any of the WWEs shit. There's other things that are for adults but the show is ultimately for the kids and that's why Cena is still on top. he's not interesting to me nor is he entertaining

uhh i think you're missing a bit of what happened. Crocker would constantly moan and groan about how poor cena was, for no reason and when it wasnt relevant. Which would have been okay, except it was all he wanted to do. There was never any other kind of post. Which is why people became so annoyed and defended cena. Most of these people would (like me) have been indifferent on Cena, as in they can see why some people dont enjoy him but at the same time can see why he has been at the top for so long and still will be for some time to come. Crocker continued to harp on and on (despite Cena absolutely killing it at the time), which as you imagine turned those who were annoyed to frustrated before enventually pissed off. And so Crocker was sent to the prison and had his name changed. All of this was fair, because never was anyone but Crocker the instigator.

 

[Crocker]

Your example was 46 year old Triple H. Comparatively, Cena is still in his prime.



I would be pleasantly surprised if Hulk Hogan had been defeated by that many people 1 on 1 in his prime.



Not really. Being around longer isn't exactly a good excuse for a flavor of the month to wreck him. The hype of somebody going over Cena would be lost. Guys like Daniel Bryan pinning him wouldn't matter in the long run if he was to lose more often.

Okay if Cena really can't afford to lose then why put upcoming guys with redhot momentum like Bray Wyatt (who had just defeated Daniel Bryan and The Shield clean) and Rusev (undefeated at the time) against him? It won't do either man any favors, so why book themselves in a corner? Cena doesn't even need to lose to put them over, just end the match in a double countout to protect both men, but nope, creative team never thought of it, and Cena never proposed the idea. Both of them are to blame.

Cena certainly didn't do any favors for Rusev and Wyatt; just because Hogan didn't do it doesn't mean Cena has to follow in his footsteps.

 

[Crocker]

You not liking him doesn't bother me (or really anyone). It's all subjective who you like, what entertains you, etc.

The whole reason Cena is pushed IS due to money. The WWE is a business. Cena is the top guy because he brings in the most money. That's it. Why would Vince intentionally do something that makes him lose money? That doesn't make sense.

A heel Cena would not make as much money as face Cena. Punk was mad that he had to turn heel for Rock. Why was he mad? He said that heels make significantly less in merch and other stuff. He had to basically take a pay cut by turning heel.

You my friend are very naive..

Yes, the company's main intention is to make money, but Vince has his own personal goals, such as pushing the guys that fit his mold. On multiple interviews Daniel Bryan has stated that he was never supposed to be in the main event of WM 30, he was just supposed to be in the mid card fighting Sheamus. Instead, Batista vs Orton would've main evented. Why would Vince intentionally keep a man THAT over out of the main event?

Another case is Zack Ryder. I remember when this guy was red hot; people were chanting his name everywhere, he was getting enormous pops, merchandise sales were pretty good. Sure, his character wasn't main event material, but he could've been milked out more, instead of getting buried by Kane.

Now lets look at Alberto Del Rio and Sheamus. These two men are constantly pushed despite not living up to their expectations. You can literally hear crickets when Alberto Del Rio came out because nobody gave a fuck about him. I guess he appeals to the Mexican market, but what reason is that to push someone just because they appeal to a certain ethnicity? Who knows though maybe thats why this company decided to push Khali. Lets look at Sheamus then. When has this man ever made a difference in ratings, buyrates, etc. When you look at his accolades, his drawing power certainly doesn't warrant having that many accomplishments.

At the end of the day, Vince would rather satisfy his own ego than make the most money

 

[Crocker]

Yes, because Reigns and Cena are totally on the same level. Oh wait, they aren't

And last I checked Dean Ambrose is still an upper mid carder on the same level as Reigns and Wyatt.

Orton lost 5 ppvs in a row last year and he was fine. I hear people on this forum say that wins and losses dont matter because its pro wrestling, but when it comes to John Cena, everyone is saying he can't lose 3 ppvs in a row or else it will hurt his credibility.

Btw Dean Ambrose is a upper mid carder, but the way he is booked, i can easily tell that the company does not value him that much. He's constantly jobbing on television, while Reigns picks up the wins. Take the match against Big Show as an example, where Big Show got the offense in the majority of the match, and won by count-out. That just made Ambrose look as if he can't even hang with the Big Show of all people. Meanwhile Reigns is beating Show multiple times like he's nothing. Wyatt is also pretty protected compared to Ambrose. They're all upper mid carders, but the pecking order is clear as day; Reigns, Wyatt, Ambrose. To suggest that they are all on the same level is just asinine.

 

[Bernkastel]

Orton lost 5 ppvs in a row last year and he was fine. I hear people on this forum say that wins and losses dont matter because its pro wrestling, but when it comes to John Cena, everyone is saying he can't lose 3 ppvs in a row or else it will hurt his credibility.

Btw Dean Ambrose is a upper mid carder, but the way he is booked, i can easily tell that the company does not value him that much. He's constantly jobbing on television, while Reigns picks up the wins. Take the match against Big Show as an example, where Big Show got the offense in the majority of the match, and won by count-out. That just made Ambrose look as if he can't even hang with the Big Show of all people. Meanwhile Reigns is beating Show multiple times like he's nothing. Wyatt is also pretty protected compared to Ambrose. They're all upper mid carders, but the pecking order is clear as day; Reigns, Wyatt, Ambrose. To suggest that they are all on the same level is just asinine.

Orton was also the clear heel going into those matches. And was booked as such. John Cena may act like a heel sometimes, but he's not treated that way with the bookings.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

You my friend are very naive..

Yes, the company's main intention is to make money, but Vince has his own personal goals, such as pushing the guys that fit his mold. On multiple interviews Daniel Bryan has stated that he was never supposed to be in the main event of WM 30, he was just supposed to be in the mid card fighting Sheamus. Instead, Batista vs Orton would've main evented. Why would Vince intentionally keep a man THAT over out of the main event?

Another case is Zack Ryder. I remember when this guy was red hot; people were chanting his name everywhere, he was getting enormous pops, merchandise sales were pretty good. Sure, his character wasn't main event material, but he could've been milked out more, instead of getting buried by Kane.

Now lets look at Alberto Del Rio and Sheamus. These two men are constantly pushed despite not living up to their expectations. You can literally hear crickets when Alberto Del Rio came out because nobody gave a fuck about him. I guess he appeals to the Mexican market, but what reason is that to push someone just because they appeal to a certain ethnicity? Who knows though maybe thats why this company decided to push Khali. Lets look at Sheamus then. When has this man ever made a difference in ratings, buyrates, etc. When you look at his accolades, his drawing power certainly doesn't warrant having that many accomplishments.

At the end of the day, Vince would rather satisfy his own ego than make the most money

I love delusional rants like these. Sure, VKM hates money, so he won't push people who could possibly make more of it for him

But I bolded the one part because the answer is easy: money. Khali was popular (and still is) in India, so they buy his merch. ADR was supposed to take up the big Hispanic role so those markets would eat up his merch. Sheamus - Ireland. It's not complicated.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

Okay if Cena really can't afford to lose then why put upcoming guys with redhot momentum like Bray Wyatt (who had just defeated Daniel Bryan and The Shield clean) and Rusev (undefeated at the time) against him?

Idk...because they know people will pay to see those matches? It makes them money?

It won't do either man any favors, so why book themselves in a corner?

It's a horrible trope around here when people think losing to WWE's biggest star somehow "books them into a corner". It doesn't. I consider Rusev a bigger threat after going toe to toe with Cena than I do him running through jobbers. And before Cena Bryan was just a guy that said Yes! a lot. In no way was any superstar's momentum crushed after losing to Cena.

The crushing happened after the writers got lazy.

Cena doesn't even need to lose to put them over, just end the match in a double countout to protect both men, but nope, creative team never thought of it, and Cena never proposed the idea. Both of them are to blame.

This isn't the 90s. People literally get pissed when they see screwy finishes. SummerSlam tried protecting Taker and Lesnar in a similar fashion. It was shit on by a majority here and on other forums.

Such endings aren't what people pay to see anymore.

Cena certainly didn't do any favors for Rusev and Wyatt; just because Hogan didn't do it doesn't mean Cena has to follow in his footsteps.

It's WWE. They've been rehashing the same old things that made them a fuckton of money. And Cena continues to draw in the cash by doing what Hogan did (but losing much more often).

Why stop doing what puts asses in seats?

 

[Crocker]

I love delusional rants like these. Sure, VKM hates money, so he won't push people who could possibly make more of it for him

But I bolded the one part because the answer is easy: money. Khali was popular (and still is) in India, so they buy his merch. ADR was supposed to take up the big Hispanic role so those markets would eat up his merch. Sheamus - Ireland. It's not complicated.

I love how you ignored my other points. Refusing to put DB in the main event of WM 30 despite him being the most universally liked and most over in a long time.. that will definitely make them money huh?

Also this just proves my first post of this thread, that being a draw doesn't necessarily mean you're entertaining; it just means you appeal to a demographic that is willing to pay a lot of money. Khali appeals to the Indian market, which is like 2% of the WWE universe, but he's boring as fuck to everyone else.

 

[Crocker]

Idk...because they know people will pay to see those matches? It makes them money?

Good for short term buyrates; bad for long term momentum. Not a good business decision.

It's a horrible trope around here when people think losing to WWE's biggest star somehow "books them into a corner". It doesn't. I consider Rusev a bigger threat after going toe to toe with Cena than I do him running through jobbers. And before Cena Bryan was just a guy that said Yes! a lot. In no way was any superstar's momentum crushed after losing to Cena.

Its one thing to lose ONE time to Cena. Its another thing to lose THREE fucking PPVS in a row to him, or in the case of Wyatt, win with the help of 3 other people (after he defated Shield and Daniel Bryan clean as a whistle), and then lose two other matches cleanly.

The crushing happened after the writers got lazy.

Its a combination of both but mostly from Cena's doing.

This isn't the 90s. People literally get pissed when they see screwy finishes. SummerSlam tried protecting Taker and Lesnar in a similar fashion. It was shit on by a majority here and on other forums.

People will bitch either way; if its a clean finish people will complain about someone getting buried or looking weak. So why not do the option that makes both men look stronger? I actually liked the SS ending as Taker got his win back yet it made Lesnar look extremely strong. I also liked the Ambrose vs Rollins match at MITB as it protected Ambrose. Too bad they aren't keeping that strong booking that he had at MITB.

It's WWE. They've been rehashing the same old things that made them a fuckton of money. And Cena continues to draw in the cash by doing what Hogan did (but losing much more often).

Why stop doing what puts asses in seats?

Because Cena isn't gonna be around forever. He's 38 years old and there are a large crop of new talent coming in. Even my dad whos a casual fan, said Cena is over the hill and been around too long compared to young guys like Reigns, Rollins etc.. and a friend who is also a casual friend, said that whats the point of buying these PPVS when Cena will obviously win? I mean these are CASUAL fans saying this stuff.

 

[Cena Is A Punk Rocker]

This thread is just the same shit over and over and over. The former Crocker spitting the same rhetoric. The rest of you making the same counter argument. Its not even entertaining anymore.

 

[A11oftheLights]

People will bitch either way; if its a clean finish people will complain about someone getting buried or looking weak. So why not do the option that makes both men look stronger? I actually liked the SS ending as Taker got his win back yet it made Lesnar look extremely strong. I also liked the Ambrose vs Rollins match at MITB as it protected Ambrose. Too bad they aren't keeping that strong booking that he had at MITB.

probably the smartest thing you've said

 

[BringThePain834]

[YOUTUBE]k5FnCjJl014[/YOUTUBE]

 

[therockiswwf]

You my friend are very naive..

Yes, the company's main intention is to make money, but Vince has his own personal goals, such as pushing the guys that fit his mold. On multiple interviews Daniel Bryan has stated that he was never supposed to be in the main event of WM 30, he was just supposed to be in the mid card fighting Sheamus. Instead, Batista vs Orton would've main evented. Why would Vince intentionally keep a man THAT over out of the main event?

Another case is Zack Ryder. I remember when this guy was red hot; people were chanting his name everywhere, he was getting enormous pops, merchandise sales were pretty good. Sure, his character wasn't main event material, but he could've been milked out more, instead of getting buried by Kane.

Now lets look at Alberto Del Rio and Sheamus. These two men are constantly pushed despite not living up to their expectations. You can literally hear crickets when Alberto Del Rio came out because nobody gave a fuck about him. I guess he appeals to the Mexican market, but what reason is that to push someone just because they appeal to a certain ethnicity? Who knows though maybe thats why this company decided to push Khali. Lets look at Sheamus then. When has this man ever made a difference in ratings, buyrates, etc. When you look at his accolades, his drawing power certainly doesn't warrant having that many accomplishments.

At the end of the day, Vince would rather satisfy his own ego than make the most money

Well think about it from Vince's bubble. Big returning star Batista. Big star Orton. Lots of history and only had (I think) one feud. So in his bubble, I could totally see why he tried to book that.

That Ryder thing was bad. I agree. However it doesn't prove they don't want to make money. It just proves that they don't think things through sometimes.

Someone else responded to the Sheamus, Del Rio and Khali stuff so I won't address that.

Ps - Yes I know it took me forever to respond to this.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

Good for short term buyrates; bad for long term momentum. Not a good business decision.

I'm sure you know better than the people who go to work via limousines.

Its one thing to lose ONE time to Cena. Its another thing to lose THREE fucking PPVS in a row to him, or in the case of Wyatt, win with the help of 3 other people (after he defated Shield and Daniel Bryan clean as a whistle), and then lose two other matches cleanly.

Are these people still being featured prominently on Raw? Are they in feuds at this moment, or are heavily talked about?

Then Cena didn't hurt their momentum. That's not how losing momentum works.

Its a combination of both but mostly from Cena's doing.

Oh I forgot. Cena is the one in charge of putting the matches together and writing the scripts. Silly me.

People will bitch either way; if its a clean finish people will complain about someone getting buried or looking weak. So why not do the option that makes both men look stronger? I actually liked the SS ending as Taker got his win back yet it made Lesnar look extremely strong. I also liked the Ambrose vs Rollins match at MITB as it protected Ambrose. Too bad they aren't keeping that strong booking that he had at MITB.

For once I'm in complete agreement here. You can't please everybody. Now keep that in mind next time you go on a spiel about how Cena (the one people pay to see win) should lose more often.

Because Cena isn't gonna be around forever.

He's not exactly Ric Flair here.

He's 38 years old

Same age as Brock Lesnar, a guy they've pushed much, much harder than Cena in the past couple of years.

and there are a large crop of new talent coming in.

Indeed. And each and every one has been treated as a big fucking deal, now haven't they? Even NXT has become a staple to WWE instead of the watered down Tough Enough that it previously was.

Even my dad whos a casual fan, said Cena is over the hill and been around too long compared to young guys like Reigns, Rollins etc..

He would have hated wrestling back in the 90s.

and a friend who is also a casual friend, said that whats the point of buying these PPVS when Cena will obviously win? I mean these are CASUAL fans saying this stuff.

Gah, why should I go see The Avengers if I know they're going to save the day all the time?

It's a tv show with Cena as its main protagonist. Of course he's going to fucking win more than he loses.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

Why is this still going on? You all just go back-and-forth and never get anywhere. Just stop it.