Ambiguous Turd
Mid-Card Championship Winner
How could WWE botch something this big? They had the biggest, most intriguing character they've had in years. YEARS. And they completely blew it. I shouldn't be surprised as WWE has blown so many things over the years. But this is absolutely mind-boggling how they could botch something that was red hot in this day and age (since so few things they do actually are anymore) and completely waste it.
The reason the angle was red hot, in my view, and drew so many people in was because people wanted to believe that Orton's character really was psychotic and had IED. They went with that for a few weeks after he punted Vince. Then, they turned his character into a pussy heel like Edge, which began to ruin everything they built. Then, they seemed to realize that they are ruining his character, and therefore to try to make a recovery with his gimmick, do the red hot segment between him, Triple H, and Stephanie with him DDT'ing Stephanie and kissing her in front of her husband. Finally, they completely ruin it the following week, where Orton basically admitted he didn't have IED and knew what he was doing all along. What the Hell was WWE thinking? They just essentially took ALL of the intrigue and heat out of Orton's character with this admission.
I am just curious how everyone else feels on this issue, as I haven't seen nearly the outrage on this that I thought I would online. It could be that maybe people are used to WWE botching this stuff on a regular basis, and therefore are just keeping their frustration to themselves. Or maybe, people think what WWE did with Orton was right, in making him just like an everyday, run-of-the-mill heel. I don't know. I just wanted to solicit some feedback on this.
Now, there are going to be those defenders of what WWE did, who come on here and say that "Orton is still in the title picture" and all that nonsense. Which is true. But that doesn't take away from the fact that WWE actually had an original, red hot character (key word CHARACTER), which was something they haven't had in years, that the audience was majorly into. And they completely took away everything about him that the crowd found intriguing.
The funny thing was that I was on the "blame Stephanie" Bandwagon for a long time. Yet, after hearing about Vince's behavior leading up to Mania, and his dominance over the Creative Team, I actually put the blame of all of Creative's problems on Vince McMahon himself, and I will continue to do so until he removes himself from the Creative process and allows Stephanie to be 100% accountable for Creative on her own.
I truly think Vince is the one who is causing all of Creative's problems over the years, and that Stephanie is more so just a figurehead with the title of being "EVP of Creative", with Vince being the real one in charge of Creative. It's obvious since it his company, that he will be involved to an extent, but I think he is waaaay too involved for a Chairman of the Board in this aspect of the company, and feel he should let his workers do their thing, while holding them accountable.
What are everyone's thoughts on what WWE did with Orton, and to a second extent, what are your thoughts on who is the primary person responsible for Creative's problems over the years?
The reason the angle was red hot, in my view, and drew so many people in was because people wanted to believe that Orton's character really was psychotic and had IED. They went with that for a few weeks after he punted Vince. Then, they turned his character into a pussy heel like Edge, which began to ruin everything they built. Then, they seemed to realize that they are ruining his character, and therefore to try to make a recovery with his gimmick, do the red hot segment between him, Triple H, and Stephanie with him DDT'ing Stephanie and kissing her in front of her husband. Finally, they completely ruin it the following week, where Orton basically admitted he didn't have IED and knew what he was doing all along. What the Hell was WWE thinking? They just essentially took ALL of the intrigue and heat out of Orton's character with this admission.
I am just curious how everyone else feels on this issue, as I haven't seen nearly the outrage on this that I thought I would online. It could be that maybe people are used to WWE botching this stuff on a regular basis, and therefore are just keeping their frustration to themselves. Or maybe, people think what WWE did with Orton was right, in making him just like an everyday, run-of-the-mill heel. I don't know. I just wanted to solicit some feedback on this.
Now, there are going to be those defenders of what WWE did, who come on here and say that "Orton is still in the title picture" and all that nonsense. Which is true. But that doesn't take away from the fact that WWE actually had an original, red hot character (key word CHARACTER), which was something they haven't had in years, that the audience was majorly into. And they completely took away everything about him that the crowd found intriguing.
The funny thing was that I was on the "blame Stephanie" Bandwagon for a long time. Yet, after hearing about Vince's behavior leading up to Mania, and his dominance over the Creative Team, I actually put the blame of all of Creative's problems on Vince McMahon himself, and I will continue to do so until he removes himself from the Creative process and allows Stephanie to be 100% accountable for Creative on her own.
I truly think Vince is the one who is causing all of Creative's problems over the years, and that Stephanie is more so just a figurehead with the title of being "EVP of Creative", with Vince being the real one in charge of Creative. It's obvious since it his company, that he will be involved to an extent, but I think he is waaaay too involved for a Chairman of the Board in this aspect of the company, and feel he should let his workers do their thing, while holding them accountable.
What are everyone's thoughts on what WWE did with Orton, and to a second extent, what are your thoughts on who is the primary person responsible for Creative's problems over the years?