ECW Region, Third Round, Street Fight: (1) John Cena vs. (9) Terry Funk

[Con T.]

Ok, the big matches? The Wrestlemanias?

Interesting; The Miz beat John Cena at Wrestlemania.

JBL beat him at a pay per view.

Del Rio? PPV

I love how you argue that I should ignore Cena's trivial losses, while remembering Funk's losses. Why? Because it doesn't suit your argument?

I have shown evidence that Cena will put over other guys when needed, and you told me to ignore. It doesn't work that way.

Oh, and if you must know;

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Oh, and the election ended months ago. Get a new sig, already.

 

[deem]

You know, I've grown weary of this Punk-RVD, so at least for me, I'll drop it.

What about JBL?

What about Del Rio?

What about the Miz?

What about Tensai?

None of you seem to get my point, that while Cena does win, he has a habit of losing to lesser talent. This is what separates Hogan from Cena; Cena is far more prone to do the job. And granted, he had more shows to wrestle on, but evidence shows Cena loses to lesser talent.

The closest possible thing to compare what this match will be like with Terry Funk is probably the New York Brawl with JBL. Except, Funk's more sadistic, and is flat out better.

Lol of COURSE Cena has more losses on his resume than Hogan, it's the nature of working only Raw/Smackdown/PPV Vs three PPV's a year and house shows for the rest. Hogan was soo rarely booked in a Superstars match, I wouldn't expect him to lose often at house shows as he was so frequently the champion, which means he has about three opportunities a year to lose a match.

That's an extreme, but Cena's win/loss is actually still comparable with Hulk's overall (how close their number of matches is really points out how active Cena is, almost none of it on house shows either)

Hogan - 1479 wins, 108 draws, 339 defeats.
John Cena - 1347 wins, 57 draws, 337 defeats.

If you wanna compare primes, I'd take Hogan from 1987 and Cena from 2007

Hogan in 1987 - 145 wins, 18 defeats
Cena in 2007 - 111 wins, 13 defeats. (Cena injured in early October, hence worked less).

So yeah, it holds up.

You wanna pull out examples of losses against inferior talent? I mean, you can do that for literally any recent main eventer in the WWE. ANY of them. But I mean, I'll humour you and address each of them.

First up, Tensai! Even not including results for A-Train Vs Cena (which Cena won 11-3), you've handily picked the only win Lord Tensai have over John - ignoring the 6 wins Cena had in return - sure it was Extreme Rules but Cena won the three Last Man Standing matches. PLUS, it was highly pushed at the time that Cena was having his "worst year ever", having failed with MitB cash in, losing to Rock at Mania, losing to Lauranitus, Ziggler, etc. This is absolutely NOT prime Cena, it's stuck in a rut Cena. Still, 6-1 vs Tensai in this time.

Next, Miz. This one is better, since he actually beat Cena on the biggest stage in a No DQ - albeit with a huge hand from Rocky, which isn't happening here. Oh, and he took the strap from Miz at the next PPV too and retained in an I Quit match! Again, great work picking out one of Miz's four wins over Cena and ignoring the 59 wins Cena has in return. Oh, three street fights against Miz were in there too - Cena won them all.

Same old story for Del Rio - 26 wins for John Vs 3 wins for Del Rio. To be fair, all three of Del Rio's wins came in gimmick matches so I'll give you this one - he's got W's Vs Cena in a Last Man Standing match, a steel cage and a falls count anywhere. Cena has won a street fight against him but yeah, this holds up.

Overall record against JBL - 24 wins 6 losses. In gimmick matches - 3-3 - two of these are from the same weekend in 2004 on a house show though, a year before Cena had even claimed his first WWE title over JBL at Mania.


I mean look, I get it. Cena DOES lose gimmick matches occasionally. As does every main eventer in modern day WWE. Funk loses them too, as does every wrestler ever. This is a lot simpler than that.

It's a big stage. You really think jobbing to Tensai on Raw has a direct relation to whether he advances here or not in the last 32 for the greatest ever? The more fitting research, rather than looking at house shows and tv tapings, is to look at Cena when he's needed to win the most.

Fuck it, I'll do it. Every Cena one-on-one result on PPV with legal weapons coming.

2005 - beats JBL in I Quit match
2006 - loses to RVD at ONS (EDGE, before people start that nonsense again), beats Sabu in extreme lumberjack match, beats Edge in TLC match to win title
2007 - beats Umaga Last Man Standing, beats Khali falls count anywhere.
2008 - beats JBL first blood match, loses to JBL parking lot brawl.
2009 - loses to Edge last man standing (BIG SHOW), beats Orton I Quit match, loses to Orton inside cell, beats Orton Ironman falls count anywhere, loses to Sheamus tables match.
2010 - Beats Batista last man standing, beats Batista I Quit, loses to Sheamus in a cage, beats Barrett in chairs match.
2011 - loses to Miz No DQ match (ROCK), beats Miz in an I Quit match, loses to Del Rio last man standing.
2012 - beats Kane ambulance match, beats Lesnar extreme rules match, loses to Lauranitus no DQ (BIG SHOW), beats Big Show in a cage, loses to Ziggler TLC (AJ).

Scratching off all the ones with huge outside interference, which isn't allowed in this match - 15 wins, 5 losses.

Considering how amazing Cena's win/loss ratio is compared to Hogans, that's still poor in gimmick matches. It DOES appear that gimmick matches are a great equaliser of John's kayfabe success.

I'm still saying Cena should/would get through as I really think Funk would be willing to job to a guy that has had far more relevance in the industry than he's ever had. I stand by earlier points that Cena has a habit of winning when in an opponents speciality match within kayfabe too. You can pull results from house shows of Cena losing in no-DQ all you like, it's not gonna make me logically think Funk would go over him here. I LOVE Funk too, I just think this is absolutely where he'd logically fall.

 

[Da Solo]

This is really hard for me, but after reading all of these things posted and applying them to what I knew beforehand, I have to go with Terry Funk:

1. This is ECW. Cena should not win in ECW against Funk under any circumstances if we went at face value. If we're going outside of kayfabe, then it's a bad booking decision that will incite riots. If we're keeping it in kayfabe, this is ECW where the fans hand weapons to the wrestlers, and I'm pretty damn sure they wouldn't lend Cena a roll of tape if his arm was falling off. Not to mention that they will boo the crap out of him, and Cena has a thing with getting psyched out in matches where he is preconceived to be booed out the building (vs. Punk in Chi-Town, vs. Rock in Miami, vs. RVD in ONS, etc.)

2. Cena loses clutch matches when there's no title involved because he is no longer the underdog. Shawn beat him when there was no title, Rock beat him when there was no title, Batista beat him when there was no title, Dolph beat him when there was no title, The Shield got one over on him when there was no title, and out of all of those the only one that needed outside interference was Dolph, and he was an upper midcarder while all the others are main-eventing. Without the title on the line, Cena loses some of his superman luster.

3. Funk is already a legend and one of the G.O.A.T's of the biz, but now he is in his element, and even though Cena's element is beating other's in their element, that negates itself when you factor in 1 and 2. Adding this on top of is just overkill at this point. I'm not debating the fact that Cena could win, because he very well could, and it's not impossible, but I can say with confidence that Funk wins this match at least 51% of the time.

 

[Teddy Irving]

Cena has won some no holds barred matches ( which is basically just a street fight) but I honestly don't think Cena has ever been up against anyone like Terry Funk. Cena might have a record of winning his opponents stimpulation matches but I just don't know if Cena has what it takes to keep the Funker down in this sort of match. I mean look at the things Funk has gone through:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFI3gG_POCk

This is what it took for Mick Foley to beat him in the japanese death match. Funk expected the ring to explode and he stood/lay in the middle of it waiting for it to happen. The guy is legit tough as nails and bat shit crazy. Now I will admit that the ring didn't actually explode but Funk expected it too and he lay there waiting for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPbn8Hsrv1g

Here's one where it does explode if anyone wants to see it.

The real question here for me is: Is Cena capable of doing the sort of things it appears are needed to keep Funk down? He is not booked as the sort of guy who would do that to another human being and I am not sure he would be comfortable doing it if asked to do so.
Funk on the other hand would not hesitate to do this sort of stuff to Cena. The man is hardcore, even Mick Foley considers the man the true hardcore legend and thinks that Funk is completely mental and willing to do anything.

I don't think Cena can do what it takes to beat Funk here and that's why I see Funk winning this match in the end.

 

[Con T.]

Lol of COURSE Cena has more losses on his resume than Hogan, it's the nature of working only Raw/Smackdown/PPV Vs three PPV's a year and house shows for the rest. Hogan was soo rarely booked in a Superstars match, I wouldn't expect him to lose often at house shows as he was so frequently the champion, which means he has about three opportunities a year to lose a match.

That's an extreme, but Cena's win/loss is actually still comparable with Hulk's overall (how close their number of matches is really points out how active Cena is, almost none of it on house shows either)

Hogan - 1479 wins, 108 draws, 339 defeats.
John Cena - 1347 wins, 57 draws, 337 defeats.

If you wanna compare primes, I'd take Hogan from 1987 and Cena from 2007

Hogan in 1987 - 145 wins, 18 defeats
Cena in 2007 - 111 wins, 13 defeats. (Cena injured in early October, hence worked less).

So yeah, it holds up.

You wanna pull out examples of losses against inferior talent? I mean, you can do that for literally any recent main eventer in the WWE. ANY of them. But I mean, I'll humour you and address each of them.

First up, Tensai! Even not including results for A-Train Vs Cena (which Cena won 11-3), you've handily picked the only win Lord Tensai have over John - ignoring the 6 wins Cena had in return - sure it was Extreme Rules but Cena won the three Last Man Standing matches. PLUS, it was highly pushed at the time that Cena was having his "worst year ever", having failed with MitB cash in, losing to Rock at Mania, losing to Lauranitus, Ziggler, etc. This is absolutely NOT prime Cena, it's stuck in a rut Cena. Still, 6-1 vs Tensai in this time.

Next, Miz. This one is better, since he actually beat Cena on the biggest stage in a No DQ - albeit with a huge hand from Rocky, which isn't happening here. Oh, and he took the strap from Miz at the next PPV too and retained in an I Quit match! Again, great work picking out one of Miz's four wins over Cena and ignoring the 59 wins Cena has in return. Oh, three street fights against Miz were in there too - Cena won them all.

Same old story for Del Rio - 26 wins for John Vs 3 wins for Del Rio. To be fair, all three of Del Rio's wins came in gimmick matches so I'll give you this one - he's got W's Vs Cena in a Last Man Standing match, a steel cage and a falls count anywhere. Cena has won a street fight against him but yeah, this holds up.

Overall record against JBL - 24 wins 6 losses. In gimmick matches - 3-3 - two of these are from the same weekend in 2004 on a house show though, a year before Cena had even claimed his first WWE title over JBL at Mania.


I mean look, I get it. Cena DOES lose gimmick matches occasionally. As does every main eventer in modern day WWE. Funk loses them too, as does every wrestler ever. This is a lot simpler than that.

It's a big stage. You really think jobbing to Tensai on Raw has a direct relation to whether he advances here or not in the last 32 for the greatest ever? The more fitting research, rather than looking at house shows and tv tapings, is to look at Cena when he's needed to win the most.

Fuck it, I'll do it. Every Cena one-on-one result on PPV with legal weapons coming.

2005 - beats JBL in I Quit match
2006 - loses to RVD at ONS (EDGE, before people start that nonsense again), beats Sabu in extreme lumberjack match, beats Edge in TLC match to win title
2007 - beats Umaga Last Man Standing, beats Khali falls count anywhere.
2008 - beats JBL first blood match, loses to JBL parking lot brawl.
2009 - loses to Edge last man standing (BIG SHOW), beats Orton I Quit match, loses to Orton inside cell, beats Orton Ironman falls count anywhere, loses to Sheamus tables match.
2010 - Beats Batista last man standing, beats Batista I Quit, loses to Sheamus in a cage, beats Barrett in chairs match.
2011 - loses to Miz No DQ match (ROCK), beats Miz in an I Quit match, loses to Del Rio last man standing.
2012 - beats Kane ambulance match, beats Lesnar extreme rules match, loses to Lauranitus no DQ (BIG SHOW), beats Big Show in a cage, loses to Ziggler TLC (AJ).

Scratching off all the ones with huge outside interference, which isn't allowed in this match - 15 wins, 5 losses.

Considering how amazing Cena's win/loss ratio is compared to Hogans, that's still poor in gimmick matches. It DOES appear that gimmick matches are a great equaliser of John's kayfabe success.

I'm still saying Cena should/would get through as I really think Funk would be willing to job to a guy that has had far more relevance in the industry than he's ever had. I stand by earlier points that Cena has a habit of winning when in an opponents speciality match within kayfabe too. You can pull results from house shows of Cena losing in no-DQ all you like, it's not gonna make me logically think Funk would go over him here. I LOVE Funk too, I just think this is absolutely where he'd logically fall.

That's all wonderful.

This isn't a series, it's a one on one match. If John Cena and Terry Funk were to wrestle in a best of series, everything you just wrote would be a hell of a lot more relevant.

It isn't. And I've already shown John Cena can be beaten by men far worse than Terry Funk, in a hardcore setting. Men far less in touch with the hardcore style, and far less experienced in it

 

[deem]

That's all wonderful.

This isn't a series, it's a one on one match. If John Cena and Terry Funk were to wrestle in a best of series, everything you just wrote would be a hell of a lot more relevant.

It isn't. And I've already shown John Cena can be beaten by men far worse than Terry Funk, in a hardcore setting. Men far less in touch with the hardcore style, and far less experienced in it

No, actually it's more relevant from a one-vs-one sense. Who has ever got the best of a prime John Cena in their first encounter? The wins you bring up, JBL, Tensai, Miz - they've all been in the wake of high profile losses to him. In fact - I think there is a HUGE trend of Cena winning the first match in a rivalry. HBK - lost at Mania before winning at Raw. HHH - lost at Mania before winning at night of champions. JBL - Lost at XX before eventually winning at GAB. Beat Lesnar in his first match against him as a main eventer - beat Khali first time on PPV, Umaga first time on PPV, Lashley first time on PPV, Orton first time on PPV, Edge first time on PPV (not counting MitB cash-in), Angle first time on PPV, Miz first time on PPV, Jericho first time on PPV - The only five I can find who won their first PPV against Cena are CM Punk, RVD, Sheamus, Rock and Batista. 12 big names beaten first time out, five big names lost to first time out. Definitely advantage Cena without previous experience of how to deal with him.


The point is - yes, because its a singles match Funk has more chance of winning. I agree, there is no way Funk would go over Cena in a feud. That's just a matter of variance though - If Cena, say, wins 70% of their matches together - in a single match, Funk is 30%. In a best of three series, it's down to 21.6% for Funk to win at least two games. In best of five, down to 9.64% for Funk to win three or more.

So yeah, it being a singles match is Funk's best chance to win - if Cena would be favourite in a feud, Cena is still favourite in a singles match though. That's just a question of maths. EVEN ignoring a trend to Cena winning the first match between a pair.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

I really like the movie Road House and it is still real to me dammit!

But I also can't believe Cena is struggling so much with Funk. People claiming Cena has to do crazy stuff to beat Funk even though the truth is Foley had to do crazy stuff to Funk because Foley isn't John Cena. Cena is a huge star and he gets wins. I know he's hated by a massive number of the IWC but it hasn't stopped his pushes or popularity. Funk was a cool character (at least I think he was playing a character) that came off as someone who might be drunkenly impervious to pain and quite sadistic. It was cool but as much as he may be hated Cena is a champ and a draw. A street fight and ECW homebase does not give Funk enough of an advantage.

 

[Con T.]

No, actually it's more relevant from a one-vs-one sense. Who has ever got the best of a prime John Cena in their first encounter? The wins you bring up, JBL, Tensai, Miz - they've all been in the wake of high profile losses to him. In fact - I think there is a HUGE trend of Cena winning the first match in a rivalry. HBK - lost at Mania before winning at Raw. HHH - lost at Mania before winning at night of champions. JBL - Lost at XX before eventually winning at GAB. Beat Lesnar in his first match against him as a main eventer - beat Khali first time on PPV, Umaga first time on PPV, Lashley first time on PPV, Orton first time on PPV, Edge first time on PPV (not counting MitB cash-in), Angle first time on PPV, Miz first time on PPV, Jericho first time on PPV - The only four I can find who won their first PPV against Cena are CM Punk, RVD, Sheamus and Batista. 12 big names beaten first time out, four big names lost to first time out. Definitely advantage Cena without previous experience of how to deal with him.


The point is - yes, because its a singles match Funk has more chance of winning. I agree, there is no way Funk would go over Cena in a feud. That's just a matter of variance though - If Cena, say, wins 70% of their matches together - in a single match, Funk is 30%. In a best of three series, it's down to 21.6% for Funk to win at least two games. In best of five, down to 9.64% for Funk to win three or more.

So yeah, it being a singles match is Funk's best chance to win - if Cena would be favourite in a feud, Cena is still favourite in a singles match though. That's just a question of maths. EVEN ignoring a trend to Cena winning the first match between a pair.

Again, wonderful.

John Cena isn't fighting any of the men you just listed. He's fighting Terry Funk, in his own environment, in his own region, and with a stipulation that let's Terry Funk as much pain as humanly possible.

Look, I posed this question at the beginning of the thread, so I'll pose it again. Terry Funk is a mad man, who will use things John Cena has never seen before, and take a shit ton of punishment, and is more experienced to take this punishment. Terry Funk would be willing to die to win the match.

So think about this:

1. Is John Cena as willing?

2. Can John Cena do what Terry Funk can?


And one more thing: Cena doesn't necessarily fare well against legends. His record against Triple H in one on one bouts is .500, same is true against Shawn, and of course there's that loss looming to The Rock.

Terry Funk is at these men's level

 

[deem]

Again, wonderful.

John Cena isn't fighting any of the men you just listed. He's fighting Terry Funk, in his own environment, in his own region, and with a stipulation that let's Terry Funk as much pain as humanly possible.

Look, I posed this question at the beginning of the thread, so I'll pose it again. Terry Funk is a mad man, who will use things John Cena has never seen before, and take a shit ton of punishment, and is more experienced to take this punishment. Terry Funk would be willing to die to win the match.

So think about this:

1. Is John Cena as willing?

2. Can John Cena do what Terry Funk can?


And one more thing: Cena doesn't necessarily fare well against legends. His record against Triple H in one on one bouts is .500, same is true against Shawn, and of course there's that loss looming to The Rock.

Terry Funk is at these men's level

This is where your argument with dual-prime Terry Funk falls down for me. I agree, the guy was a sick bastard even when he was predominantly scientific, way before the Japan bloodbaths. Has Cena faced a guy like early Funk in terms of brutality? Yeah, I'd say that a post-MMA Lesnar compares. Has he been in hardcore matches the like that Funk wrestled at that time? Yes, for sure.

[youtube]DkmPXTSYcHA[/youtube]

[youtube]34DjZdx8kfA[/youtube]

I'd say both those matches hold up well to the Funk brawls with Abby, or his I Quit Vs Flair in terms of brutality.

Has he faced old, absolutely nuts Funk in terms of aggression? No, I don't think he has. I'll tell you a guy just as nuts as him though - Mick Foley. At a similar age as this Funk would be, a green as shit Orton beat him in his own game at Backlash 2004 - and this isn't a green Orton, this is a prime John Cena.

Look, I get it, Funk's a legend and I do think some may sell him short if they judge him on the deathmatches or ECW career. You are doing the same if you think he's tenfold more hardcore than Cena has ever experienced.

And yeah I'd put Terry right in the upper echelon ever on his NWA prime. I think comparing him to HHH and HBK is a stretch, I think both have had more significant careers to him, and while those two may have traded victories with Cena, it was John that won on the biggest stage for the biggest rubs.

LETS GO CENA, FUCK YOU CHAINSAW CHARLIE

 

[JJYanks121]

Ok, the big matches? The Wrestlemanias?

Interesting; The Miz beat John Cena at Wrestlemania.

JBL beat him at a pay per view.

Del Rio? PPV

I love how you argue that I should ignore Cena's trivial losses, while remembering Funk's losses. Why? Because it doesn't suit your argument?

I have shown evidence that Cena will put over other guys when needed, and you told me to ignore. It doesn't work that way.

Oh, and if you must know;

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Oh, and the election ended months ago. Get a new sig, already.

First off, I apologize about the sig. I don't make them myself and I haven't had time to ask someone to do it and to figure out what i want. I just come on here to read and post so the sig didn't seem important.

As for continuing our argument, I never said to disregard Cena's losses, just that Funk has his as well in unimportant matches so that's a wash at best. That's all. I was saying that if Funk can lose to literally nothing talents in the business in an independent promotion, surely we can forgive Cena losing a match or two to guys who have held world titles. If anything, Cena does have an advantage here, but I'm calling it a wash for the sake of helping your argument even just a little bit.

The fact is, this comes down to people overhyping Terry Funk so that Cena can lose because people don't like Cena. It's cute, but the arguments have been incredibly weak. Cena's character is literally built on the idea of taking everything people can throw at him and still kicking their ass. That's what he does.

It seems you don't understand what a big match is though. Just because it's on a minor pay per view doesn't mean it's a big match. We're talking about feud enders. The way wrestling booking often works is that heels get cheap victories over babyfaces, brag about it, then later get their comeuppance. Thus, babyfaces lose in order to set up the big win later on to make the fans happy. This isn't a feud though, this is a tournament where it's win or go home. Thus, a heel who clearly isn't on the same level of stardom as John Cena isn't getting anything close to a victory. He's losing and losing badly.

And I have no idea what that link was supposed to be. If it was supposed to be important, you might want to repost it so it works properly.

 

[deem]

The fact is, this comes down to people overhyping Terry Funk so that Cena can lose because people don't like Cena. It's cute, but the arguments have been incredibly weak. Cena's character is literally built on the idea of taking everything people can throw at him and still kicking their ass. That's what he does.

It seems you don't understand what a big match is though. Just because it's on a minor pay per view doesn't mean it's a big match. We're talking about feud enders. The way wrestling booking often works is that heels get cheap victories over babyfaces, brag about it, then later get their comeuppance. Thus, babyfaces lose in order to set up the big win later on to make the fans happy. This isn't a feud though, this is a tournament where it's win or go home. Thus, a heel who clearly isn't on the same level of stardom as John Cena isn't getting anything close to a victory. He's losing and losing badly.

This, this, this, this, this. (other than the bit about Funk being a heel here, this would be face vs face with Cena the "heel" despite doing nothing heelish)

You know what? I started off thinking Funk had a semi-chance, but after reading some early debate voted Cena. Punk Michaels was much harder for me and after considering for an age I finally voted Punk. Now? If Funk wins, it's one of the worst decisions in the tournament so far, whereas I sorta think Michaels may deserve to beat Punk now. Every single debate has strengthened my resolve that Cena would win, every bit of research I've done. At the start of the tournament I was close to posting in the Terry Funk HQ saying I was with him all the way, he's one of my absolute faves. I'm remaining unbiased though and EVERYTHING is screaming Cena win here. Absolutely everything.

I think this would be a hell of a lot of fun and Cena will be bleeding the hard way the likes of which he hasn't in years. That said, the links I posted two up prove he can brawl and bleed with the best of them, it's just not part of his game in the PG era. Seriously, WATCH the intensity Vs Umaga when you are making asinine comments about him not having the heart to face a sadistic Terry Funk. I'm not saying Umaga or JBL are as good as Funk, but those matches are as brutal as anything Funk did in his prime.

If you wanna pick mad motherfucker with tons of heart and commitment Funk, the one adored in ECW and deathmatches that would show Cena stuff he's never seen before - then no, I'm not taking a fucking broken down 48yo over a prime Cena.

Either way, THIS IS CENAS.

LETS GO CENA, FUCK YOU TERRENCE

 

[M]

Just going to chuck in some important things to remember and some food for thought for you guys, here goes..

1. If you were running this tournament, who really would you give the win to?

Just think about that before you go off about the qualities of either of the guys here. You've got a situation where there's going to be legitimate HATE for Cena and extreme loving affection for Funk. You've got a situation where the man coming in as a FACE would possibly get the most heat EVER in this environment against a man who in the same environment would get massive cheers for even twitching his eyelid. You've got a situation where "If Cena Wins we riot" is MORE than a legitimate threat.
If you were running this tournament, would you really REALLY want to piss off your fans THAT much? You'd really want to ruin the moment of Funk beating Cena to one of the biggest pops of all time that badly? Just think about that for a while.

2. Think about the story

Fucking hell, this should be the first thing on your mind when you're comparing previous wins and expecting them to be taken seriously! Why do people forget all of a sudden that the story for a one off tournament dream match with no build is not the same as a multiple month long feud?? You people make no sense sometimes...
The Cena wins against umaga and the JBL "I Quit" match that people are trying to use is a flawed argument for that reason exactly, take umaga for example, umaga came into the scene and decimated everyone in his path before there was only one man left to face him - John Cena. The whole idea behind that is the classic knight vs dragon story where the dragon ravages the town and the heroic knight saves the day - you're not going to have that story ending with the dragon ripping the knight's head off now are you? Hence the only logical solution was to have Cena win.
The JBL storyline was a bit different, this time it was a tyrant beating down the people with dirty tricks and outside interference, terrorizing and taunting his opponents because he knew he could always flip a switch and still walk away with the title. Hopefully you've seen/read enough tales to know this story ends with the man of the people eventually winning and kicking out the tyrant (if you haven't seen/read a story where this happens, you've lived a sheltered life. It's the basis for fucking ALADDIN, you know, the incredibly popular disney movie?) so yeah of course Cena was going to win that "I Quit" match, it's the logical finale to that story - he'd just won the title, dethroned the tyrant and now it was time to kick him out of the village.

My point here is; what is the story going into THIS match? Well, you've got massively popular Funk vs gigantic ball of hate Cena in the sort of match Funk would enjoy. That's it, nothing else, no dragons for cena to face, no tyrants for cena to knock down, just the dream match between the two. What can you draw from that? Well guess what, it's time for the feel good moment of Funk winning after a close battle to the ROARING cheers of the crowd - that's it.
Cena does tend to lose the matches where the story dictates he should lose you know (see punk at MITB, RVD at ONS, Rock at Wrestlemania last year)

It just makes more sense for Funk to win, deal with it.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Got to address this because I've seen it brought up several times - Cena beat Lesnar... so what? Where did Brock garner a reputation as a great street fighter? Being UFC Champion is fine and dandy but I never saw anyone swing a barbed wire baseball bat in the octagon!

As to the "Cena only lost to Punk in Chicago due to outside interference", that's BS too. John lost because he was STUPID (the exact same reason why he lost to the Rock at WM), nothing forced him to release the STF but himself and should actually prove more reason for Funk to beat him because Terry wouldn't be that stupid!

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Got to address this because I've seen it brought up several times - Cena beat Lesnar... so what? Where did Brock garner a reputation as a great street fighter? Being UFC Champion is fine and dandy but I never saw anyone swing a barbed wire baseball bat in the octagon!

As to the "Cena only lost to Punk in Chicago due to outside interference", that's BS too. John lost because he was STUPID (the exact same reason why he lost to the Rock at WM), nothing forced him to release the STF but himself and should actually prove more reason for Funk to beat him because Terry wouldn't be that stupid!

I brought the Brock thing up. I know you saw that match. It wasn't comparing that match to a downright Funk brawl per say. It was to illustrate that Cena took a bloody beating of a lifetime and still won. And he does that surprisingly often.

Calling Cena dumb coz people interfered will be like me saying Funk is just a one trick pony and can only brawl. He ain't I heard about it, read about it, that Terry was a good hand in the ring. Cena wasn't dumb, people interfered and Punk's victories are NOT clean. Cena wouldn't be forgiving to Terry in a hardcore environment, neither would be the Funker. The point is, he has taken hellacious beatings and still won.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

I brought the Brock thing up. I know you saw that match. It wasn't comparing that match to a downright Funk brawl per say. It was to illustrate that Cena took a bloody beating of a lifetime and still won. And he does that surprisingly often.

And it still looks a walk in the park compared to what a 51 year old Funk did to Foley. Cena has yet to exhibit taking anything like that type of brutality (and most likely never will given WWe's PG policy)... and just imagine how much more damage a 31 year old prime Funk would do.

Calling Cena dumb coz people interfered will be like me saying Funk is just a one trick pony and can only brawl. He ain't I heard about it, read about it, that Terry was a good hand in the ring. Cena wasn't dumb, people interfered and Punk's victories are NOT clean. Cena wouldn't be forgiving to Terry in a hardcore environment, neither would be the Funker. The point is, he has taken hellacious beatings and still won.

They didn't interfere, Cena voluntarily released the STF to go intercept Laurenitis who was going to give him the match anyway... how is that not dumb? Rather than using his own finishers or moves on the Rock, he decides to showboat and attempt one of Rocky's signature moves and gets caught... how is that not dumb?

 

[Con T.]

Oh, fuck me.

The fact is, this comes down to people overhyping Terry Funk so that Cena can lose because people don't like Cena. It's cute, but the arguments have been incredibly weak. Cena's character is literally built on the idea of taking everything people can throw at him and still kicking their ass. That's what he does.

Let tell you something:

KB is a pretty big John Cena. If I'm correct, he's somewhere in his top five favorite wrestlers. I assume you respect his opinion?

Yeah, he voted Terry Funk.

JMT is a MASSIVE fan of John Cena's work. The guys knows his shit, and I think you respect his opinion.


Yeah, he voted Terry Funk.

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. This isn't just the mouthbreathers of the forum (Hi Dagger) saying that Terry Funk would win. If you're going to hold onto a crutch that got old about five years ago, I can assure; the vast majority of fans respect and like Cena.

But they still voted Funk.

This, this, this, this, this. (other than the bit about Funk being a heel here, this would be face vs face with Cena the "heel" despite doing nothing heelish)

You know what? I started off thinking Funk had a semi-chance, but after reading some early debate voted Cena. Punk Michaels was much harder for me and after considering for an age I finally voted Punk. Now? If Funk wins, it's one of the worst decisions in the tournament so far, whereas I sorta think Michaels may deserve to beat Punk now.

Fuck you.

Seriously, fuck off. If you're really going to call this some big tragedy, that one of the greatest of all time would beat another greatest of all time, then you're absolutely blind. You admit yourself that you love Funk, and think he's one of the greatest of all time. And you're saying that if Cena loses, it's one of the worst decisions on our forum, that one of the greatest of all time


In his promotion

In his element

With experience to things John Cena has never seen before.

And with a crowd that if I'm booking, I'm not booking Cena over Funk?


Fuck you.


And Umaga was shit

 

[deem]

Fuck you.

Seriously, fuck off. If you're really going to call this some big tragedy, that one of the greatest of all time would beat another greatest of all time, then you're absolutely blind. You admit yourself that you love Funk, and think he's one of the greatest of all time. And you're saying that if Cena loses, it's one of the worst decisions on our forum, that one of the greatest of all time


In his promotion

In his element

With experience to things John Cena has never seen before.

And with a crowd that if I'm booking, I'm not booking Cena over Funk?


Fuck you.


And Umaga was shit

This is what you aren't getting - Funk IS one of the greatest ever because he is insanely talented, dedicated as hell and has SO many fun matches that I adore - like him and Dory Vs Hansen and Brody, or his feud with Flair.

When it boils down to evaluating his success in kayfabe? He's nothing. 440 days with the NWA title in a time rife with long title reigns, before never getting back there. And nothing else other than helping establish ECW in an incredibly weak roster.

I love Funk - the reason he's one of the greatest ever has NOTHING to do with him having tons of success in the main event. His reign is highly forgettable. When people think of Funk, they think of a) Death matches b) the amazing feud with Flair. in 20-30 years time, Cena will be remembered for being the UNDISPUTED ACE of largest wrestling company ever for 8 years and counting.

That's why this would be a joke decision. Plus, the Funk arguments have been largely BS based on Cena never experiencing the brutality/not having the intensity.

On a seperate note, if you want to read a good pro-Funk post, InXanity pretty much nails the reasons Funk could win here. Way, way too much silliness from the Funk camp here though.

 

[Big Sexy]

I voted for John Cena. Most of Funk's legendary hardcore moments that we remember came well after his prime and they weren't always against the best of the best competition wise. Sure he was still tough and hardcore during his prime in the 70's and was the "King of the Texas Death Match" but I'd be willing to bet Cena has been in more hardcore matches during his prime then Funk did when he was on top in the 70's just because those matches are more prevalent in this era. I also think people are underestimating how big of a superstar Cena is. Cena is the only superstar since Hulk Hogan to have 2 world title runs that lasted at least 280 days. Austin, Rock, Triple H, Batista, Punk, Hart, HBK, none of those guys can say that. People see "Street Fight" and "Terry Funk" in the same match and it's human nature to just give him the victory but Cena is one of the handful of guys that would beat him.

 

[Teddy Irving]

That's why this would be a joke decision. Plus, the Funk arguments have been largely BS based on Cena never experiencing the brutality/not having the intensity.

It's not whether Cena has experienced the brutality or not or if he has the intensity that I question. It is whether Cena is capable of doing the things necessary to keep Funk down long enough to win the match. Anything Cena can endure Funk can take worse and we all know Funk is willing to dish out at the very least as much as he gets if not worse than what he gets.

Do you see Cena, in the way he has been booked in the last few years, being as brutal as it seems is necessary to keep Funk down? Can this John Cena, the superhero to the kids, the man who stands for Hustle, Loyalty and Respect, do the over the top brutal things he needs to do to win here. That is a big question and I don't think Cena, in the way he is booked, would be willing to do those things to an opponent, especially if there wasn't already a big personal storyline built up to this match that caused him to truly hate the man he was going up against.

Funk doesn't need that motivation to do these things to another human being, he is as brutal as they come and doesn't care how much he hurts his opponent on the way to victory.


And that is all before you consider the promotion this match is in and what sort of crowd will be there.

 

[deem]

It's not whether Cena has experienced the brutality or not or if he has the intensity that I question. It is whether Cena is capable of doing the things necessary to keep Funk down long enough to win the match. Anything Cena can endure Funk can take worse and we all know Funk is willing to dish out at the very least as much as he gets if not worse than what he gets.

Do you see Cena, in the way he has been booked in the last few years, being as brutal as it seems is necessary to keep Funk down? Can this John Cena, the superhero to the kids, the man who stands for Hustle, Loyalty and Respect, do the over the top brutal things he needs to do to win here. That is a big question and I don't think Cena, in the way he is booked, would be willing to do those things to an opponent, especially if there wasn't already a big personal storyline built up to this match that caused him to truly hate the man he was going up against.

Funk doesn't need that motivation to do these things to another human being, he is as brutal as they come and doesn't care how much he hurts his opponent on the way to victory.


And that is all before you consider the promotion this match is in and what sort of crowd will be there.

I feel like this is becoming overdebated, but YES. I'll answer in two videos, with an absolutely PRIME John Cena vs an absolutely PRIME Terry Funk. You won't find either at better than this, other than possibly Cena in a few Mania main-events. For this type of match, it's him showing he's got what it takes to keep someone down.

I've already posted highlights of the Cena match, but heres the two full matches if you wanna see who is fighting who here, rather than images of the washed up Terry being blown up in Japan. Both matches are incredible as well, well worth anyones time.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xx...-standing-wwe-championship_sport#.UVjNJ5NO8oo

That's Cena out-brawling a vicious freak, until the point that the entire ring has been dismantled, Cena has bladed deep and Cena still powers through and chokes him out with the top rope. 2007 is ABSOLUTELY prime Cena, that run was his best ever, so here you go. Not the superman, 2011 version. Oh and, you claim it needs to be personal for Cena to reach down that far? Umaga did nothing other than fucking BRING it against him. Oh, he cost Cena a match against K-Fed on Raw. That's as personal as it got between them - he'd be just as fired up Vs Funk.

Now for Funk's prime, his feud with Flair on his return to the NWA. I'll include both matches - the first is more brutal, the second is better.

[youtube]XDm5ai3-CuA[/youtube]

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8vbpk_ric-flair-vs-terry-funk-i-quit-matc_sport#.UVjPBpNO8oo

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8vbwk_ric-flair-vs-terry-funk-i-quit-matc_sport#.UVjPJZNO8oo

That's Terry Funk at his kayfabe ABSOLUTE best. Yes he's brutal, yes he's stiff, yes he's tough as nails - for all you guys hyping him as impossible to put away, he quit to a figure four and got rolled up.

There is a difference in this match - he's probably working face here and isn't submitting because of it. In the ECW arena there's no way he jobs to the STFU (although it's put some huge names away before). That said, he isn't the unbeatable sadistic maniac you guys are making him out to be, unless you want him in his 48yo form. Which is reasonable, I think it'd make for a really fun match here. Just even less of a chance of him winning than a prime Funk.

Honestly, watch both matches. I'd be amazed btw if anyone would argue that prime Cena isn't late 2006-2007 and imo prime Funk is 1989. That's 100% Cena's best years - maybeee Funk's title run was better, but he was more over and a bigger draw during his feud with Flair.

Oh and, don't just skirt the issue that prime Funk isn't as tough as your making out with BS "Flair>Cena though" arguments - that's irrelevant.

 

[El Rev sXe]

Granted, it's ECW, Funk is a fucking sadistic man, Cena lost to RVD (in order to gain credibility for the revival of ECW, otherwise he would have beaten him), Cena has lost to JBL and others in similar gimmicked matches.

But are we forgetting that Cena goes over hostile environments and wins? Are we forgetting that Cena is one tough son of a bitch (like good ol' JR would say) and can take crazy amounts of pain? Are we forgetting that Cena, if he needs to, can be also a brutal wrestler? Just ask Umaga, JBL, Batista or Edge. And most iimportantly, are we forgetting the Super Cena bullshit that the IWC hates? He overcomes this kind of matches, this kind of odds. Of course there are exceptions, but in this particular case, Cena isn't in a big match scenario (ala WM 28 or ONS) where he loses. An example can be Vengeance 2006 where Cena beat Sabu, anothe crazy motherfucker, in an extreme lumberjack match. I also have to quot this:

The most hardcore match Cena ever fought might be last year against Brock Lesnar. That dude was mean, ruthless, and it was a nasty fight. Nobody thought Cena had a chance..........and he won. That's what Cena does.

It would be a brutal match where it looks like neither man is going to lose, however I can picture Cena putting an STF with a barbed wire or something like that. A bloody Cena advances...and fuck I don't even like Cena!

 

[shattered dreams]

Yet another dumbass argument for when Funk was in his prime. According to Deem Funk's prime was when he was 45 and lost to Flair instead of when he was 31 and was the champ for over a year. Funny how he chose when Cena was 30 and champ for over a year as his prime instead of when he lost to Rock in the main event of the most bought PPV of all-time. I would love someone to tell me when they repeatedly saw babyfaces winning matches in ECW by overcoming the odds. I can think of maybe one notable case and that took two years of losing first.

 

[JJYanks121]

Yet another dumbass argument for when Funk was in his prime. According to Deem Funk's prime was when he was 45 and lost to Flair instead of when he was 31 and was the champ for over a year. Funny how he chose when Cena was 30 and champ for over a year as his prime instead of when he lost to Rock in the main event of the most bought PPV of all-time. I would love someone to tell me when they repeatedly saw babyfaces winning matches in ECW by overcoming the odds. I can think of maybe one notable case and that took two years of losing first.

A prime Terry Funk at 30 was a simple brawler who wasn't yet sadistic. He had his one run at the top and never again got close. He lost to Harley Race and that was it for him. If you're going with that Funk, that Funk has less of a chance against Cena that "sadistic Funk" of the 80's and 90's. He's the lesser Funk when it comes to being in the NWA and in their primes, Cena has much more experience is brutal matches and a much better record in them.

 

[tarp]

Terry Hardcore Funk. This match or and I Quit match is the only two matches Funk has a chance. This match is Terry Funk all the way. He is too brutal for Cena to handle. Vote Funk.

 

[deem]

Yet another dumbass argument for when Funk was in his prime. According to Deem Funk's prime was when he was 45 and lost to Flair instead of when he was 31 and was the champ for over a year. Funny how he chose when Cena was 30 and champ for over a year as his prime instead of when he lost to Rock in the main event of the most bought PPV of all-time. I would love someone to tell me when they repeatedly saw babyfaces winning matches in ECW by overcoming the odds. I can think of maybe one notable case and that took two years of losing first.

FINALLY someone has dared define the version of Funk we'd be seeing in this match. I mean, I disagree but not too strongly. I'd take a year that Funk was probably the number two heel in the country (behind Savage) over one average length title reign in an evolving era for wrestling - don't let 440 days deceive you, it's actually comparatively short for the era but I'm being nice and calling it average. If he had stayed in the title picture, maybe I'd agree.

Anyway, that's by the by. At least you've defined a Funk you want in this match, rather than having your cake and eating it by combining the sadistic, balls to the wall c4 barbed wire washed up one with the NWA champion or top heel one.

Let's see what happens when we take your Funk;

a) he's certainly less suited to the gimmick than the Japanese one, even less than the Flair feud Funk that quit to the figure four and got pinned by a roll up.
b) the reason people think he'll be super over in ECW is because he was instrumental in developing them as a federation, as well as having a reputation for excelling in deathmatches. So you lose the crowd advantage somewhat - I mean sure, they'll still hate John Cena and still love a hardcore gutsy brawler, but nowhere near the "if Funk loses we riot" level that has been assumed in this thread.
c) As an extension of b, this changes the story of the match dramatically. Sure, the odds are still seemingly stacked in their favour as ANY version of Funk is going to do well in a hardcore match. I'd proffer that the crowd would now be more anti-Cena than they are pro-Funk, even if it's close. NOW we have the negative environment that Cena truly thrives in.

Anyway, let's put that aside, because that's just arguments for a kayfabe match. I'm all for a sensible booking decision too.

So the Funk that's on offer here was arguably the number three wrestler in North America in 1976 - obviously behind Sammartino and Gagne. I'll give you him over Bockwinkel and Stan Hansen just because I can't be bothered - I think you could make a case that Funk was the #5 in North America in his best year.

Let's extend that to the decade, where do you think Funk's one reign stands him? Maybe top 10? Let's say top ten cos I'm a big fan. Somewhere between 8th and 15th let's say (please bear in mind this is extremely generous).

Vs John Cena. Undoubtedly #1 star in North America and the world since halfway through 2005. I'd say he's the star of the entire 2000s but maybe thats a stretch since Hunter worked the entire 10 years. At LEAST #1 in the world since 2005 - 8 years and counting on top.

This is incomparable.