Is John Cena already a heel?

[tjmarrs714]

This may sound stupid at first but think about it.

John Cena is always constantly being booked to win, and even when he loses it's almost always though some elaborate, over the top, unclean finish. Obviously that gets really annoying to most fans, which is why he gets booed by at least half of every crowd.

So why would WWE constantly book Cena this way if it has negative effects on the product?He's not going to gain any more fans by winning constantly. The kids aren't going to love him more than they already do.

I believe that WWE does this to purposely piss off fans. They want us to hate John Cena, and Cena wants us to hate him too. That's why guys like HHH and Cena poke fun at "internet fans", because they're freaking heels.

Cena comes out every week, says the same thing no matter the situation and refuses to change anything about himself. He's always politically correct and he has almost no personality. He will bury your favorite wrestlers and/or latch onto their popularity if they are liked more than he is. He does make a wish and then uses it to try to get you to "like him". You are supposed to hate this guy.

WWE is using the internet to their advantage. They know what we're saying in general so they incorporate it into story line. This is the reality era right? So they put stuff out there that only the adults will notice so that we can hate Cena, but it's not as obvious to the children so they can still sell merchandise to them.

I think it really kicked in when Cena beat Rock at WM. Cena defeated our childhood favorite then came out to gloat the next night on Raw. He even threw a "heel turn" jab at us.

Thing is though, I feel like he did turn heel. He turned heel by not turning heel. I know how ridiculous that sounds but just ponder it for a minute. His heel character is that he's the face of the WWE. Not that he's a baby face like Bo Dallas. But THE face of the company that won't give anyone else a chance and that refuses to change even a little, that's his heel character.

If we look at it that way then he will probably beat Lesnar at Summerslam. Either that or lose to Lesnar in dirty fashion. Maybe he beats Lesnar then gets destroyed by Brock after the match and Seth Rollins cashes in MITB to take the title. Why? So that Cena can win it back and tie Ric Flairs record and eventually surpass it. We would all watch and hate it because most of us don't think he deserves that.

If that's the way they play it, then they should never "officially" turn Cena heel. Keep him the way he is and he will be a natural heel in the eyes of fans. The big pay off could be having someone like Roman Reigns or Daniel Bryan beat him clean next WM.

But anyway, what do you guys think? Am I totally out of my mind? Or am I just kinda crazy?

 

[J.J.]

Simply put they book Cena the way they do because he is their top guy. Why not?

To be honest I don't think Cena is intentionally "burying" anyone. It's just he's booked to come out on top despite it aggravating many fans.

Needless to say this isn't all his fault. There hasn't been another guy come along to truly steal John Cena's thunder and dethrone him as face of the company. So you're going to constantly get fed him until then.

Cena defeating The Rock was inevitable, we all knew in the rematch he was going to drop the title to Cena. As kind of an unofficial; passing the torch moment.

Even at this current moment there is no star ready to carry the company the way Cena has, no matter how much they've tried. Sheamus, Daniel Bryan, The Miz, ect, ect. Guys that have been pushed to the moon despite being good, aren't it.

Even I have doubts about Roman Reigns. I remember fans being this way about Hulk Hogan during his day. He got stale, but nobody at the time was capable of taking his spot.

 

[Blade]

No. John Cena is booked as a babyface, and is therefore a babyface regardless of what the haters say. If a protagonist in a movie is disliked by a fraction of the audience, it doesn't mean he's the villain. He's still the hero. It's the writers who determine who is and isn't a hero, not the audience. That's basic storytelling.

So no, John Cena is not already a heel.

 

[FickMoley]

I tune out the announce team. I just watch Raw the way I see it. I pop for Cesaro, Ambrose, Rollins, Jericho, Del Rio, Kofi. I root against Cena, Sheamus, Paige, Orton, Rusev, Stephanie.

Try it out. Mute it. Watch the show without caring "how it's being presented." Some people love to know what Matt Weiner's interpretation of Mad Men is and how he intended the stories to be perceived, other people (like me) don't give a miz what the creator of a piece of content thinks and like to enjoy & interpret something for themselves.

The WWE won't divide their brand into better, more consumer friendly demographic slices. They won't make a late night TV-MA show, and G-rated Saturday Morning Slam is gone. It's all just one blob like Wal-Mart. SO: Would you go into a Wal-Mart Children's Section and whine about how dumb you feel looking at childish, repetitive junky toys? John Cena is a repetitive, junky toy. He's like that nasty Nickelodeon Gak, it has no appeal to adults but kids love that crap and buy lots of tubs of Cena Gak merchandise.

Just don't watch Cena segments, or, watch them and think about how much you don't like him and you hope the other guy wins or hurts him. If you can't tune Cole out, try not to think of him as an "extension of Kevin Dunn or Vince" or whatever. Just think: Cole is a knob, and I'm rooting for him to get wiped out during a brawl segment.

 

[MCMG]

To be a heel, surely one must act like a heel. Do heelish things. Attacks from behind; cheating to win; insulting fans; acting arrogant or, in many cases, using numbers to assert your dominance. Cena does literally none of these things.

Cena is a face. He gets booed by a lot of fans but that is as far as it goes. One thing is for certain, the WWE wants Cena to get booed by some people. At this point it is accepted Cena will get a mixed reaction so they may as well use it to their advantage. While fans might feel they are being brilliant and rebellious, they're not. The WWE know the more Cena gets booed by certain people, the more the targeted demographic love him. Hearing their hero get booed ensures the fans want to buy his T-shirts and wear his colours. It's simple.

Cena is in no-way a heel. He is a face that is capable of working any crowd in the country and is one of the greatest at doing so. Just because some people are blinded by hatred or don't understand pro wrestling doesn't make John Cena a heel.

 

[shafe_41]

What? Who? What did I just read?

I feel like I got dumber reading that. Just because Cena is "disliked" by over half the crowd doesn't make him the heel. Blade pretty much said it all. Storytellling 101 should tell you that Cena isn't a heel.

 

[BuriedByCena]

Cena=Heel to Adult men. Face to Women/Children.

Only reason they do this is because of PG era and T-shirt sales to kids.

However if they brought back rapper/amazing "Heel" Cena when he was actually cool in 2003, Cena would be LOVED by all fans(men/women/children). And T-shirt sales would go through the roof.

I wish Vince would realize this. I only own Cena's first word life shirt from 2003 or whatever it was. Cena made me LMAO every week on Smackdown. I looked forward to his rap every week. Then he went to RAW and stopped rapping, started smiling all the time and became super corny. He will never get my money until he becomes cool again.

The only Shirts I have from wrestlers are from the cool bad*** ones. I have Stone Cold shirts, The Rock shirts, Cena's first shirt and CM Punks AMAZING shirts. Heck I got a Kurt Angle shirt with an American flag on it even though I am Canadian. I bought it to support Kurt because he was dah best back then.

This PG era needs to end. It's time to go back to the sensationalism of the Attitude era or the awesomeness of the Ruthless aggression era. Either one would generate a lot more money.

 

[tjmarrs714]

No. John Cena is booked as a babyface, and is therefore a babyface regardless of what the haters say. If a protagonist in a movie is disliked by a fraction of the audience, it doesn't mean he's the villain. He's still the hero. It's the writers who determine who is and isn't a hero, not the audience. That's basic storytelling.

So no, John Cena is not already a heel.

WWE isn't a movie though. It's a weekly show with constant changes. You can't edit the script of a movie once it's already released. WWE can change where they want to go any minute.

I was suggesting that the writers, Vince, or whoever might be booking Cena as heel to people like us who like to think we're in the know, and maybe as a face to the children.

It just kind of gets ridiculous with Cena sometimes, too ridiculous to just think that they're just being stupid.

What? Who? What did I just read?

I feel like I got dumber reading that. Just because Cena is "disliked" by over half the crowd doesn't make him the heel. Blade pretty much said it all. Storytellling 101 should tell you that Cena isn't a heel.

You did get dumber, welcome to my level


[QUOTECena=Heel to Adult men. Face to Women/Children.][/QUOTE]

That's what I mean.

I get where all of you are coming from though.

 

[Catacomb]

you know, the op is kinda right. the traditional babyface role is dead, and gets booed everytime wwe tries to break it out, first it started with hogan, then when angle came in he was supposed to be face, but got booed out of the building. id be surprised if hhh didnt know this. with cena acting like the traditional babyface he is getting booed, and if the crowd boos, you are a heel. also look at cenas feud with punk, cena was the "heel" who didnt care how the crowd reacted, he was gonna do things his way regardless. that is the logic a heel would use. cena is not a clear cut heel though, but at the same time he is not a clear cut babyface either.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

Even at this current moment there is no star ready to carry the company the way Cena has, no matter how much they've tried. Sheamus, Daniel Bryan, The Miz, ect, ect. Guys that have been pushed to the moon despite being good, aren't it.

Here's a mind-blowing idea: Stop trying to have one star "carry" the company. When was WWF/E pulling in it's best ratings? When you had multiple guys like Austin/Rock/Undertaker/ect collectively carrying the company and no one guy was THE guy.

 

[therockiswwf]

Here's a mind-blowing idea: Stop trying to have one star "carry" the company. When was WWF/E pulling in it's best ratings? When you had multiple guys like Austin/Rock/Undertaker/ect collectively carrying the company and no one guy was THE guy.

Actually you are wrong. When Austin was there, he was the top guy. Rock only became the top guy after Austin had to take time off for his neck.

Undertaker was really never the top guy at any point.

There is a reason the WWE hasn't ever really had two top full time guys.

1) WWE can't create a top guy at will. So they never really have an abundance of top faces unless the guys themselves are good.

2) This is the biggest reason, one person ultimately becomes more popular than everyone else.

I'm sure WWE would have loved having multiple guys with Cena's popularity but that isn't something they can create. Guys can get very hot and near Cena's level but staying at that level is incredibly hard.


Back on topic.
Jim Ross has talked about this before and he actually made a really good point. If the point of a heel is to make the crowd hate them so much they want to see him get killed and the point of a face is to make the crowd love them so much they want to see him win, isn't Cena already doing both.

If you look strictly at his character, then Cena is not a heel. But if you look at the point of heels and faces, he is both. People will watch and hope Cena gets destroyed. While other people will watch and hope Cena overcomes whatever is thrown at him.

 

[ABMorales787]

I.... I think I lost some IQ points reading this. Let me see if I got this straight because it blew my mind and I think my appendix too.

You're telling me that the guy that always tells us to never give up. Who always stands up for the underdog. Who does battle against the evils of Randy Orton, Alberto Del Rio, The Miz, Edge, Bray Wyatt, The Authority and so on for 10 years straight, saluting Marines and granting more wishes to ill children than the Fairly Odd Parents is actually an evil son of a bitch?

Because people boo him?!

Oh my God!

Next you're gonna tell me how amazing a heel Dixie Carter is because of how so many people despise her, right? Or that Satan is actually good because people like to cheer bad guys.

 

[Blade]

It's been a while since I did this. Hope I'm not too rusty.

Cena=Heel to Adult men. Face to Women/Children.

Well then, I guess women and children understand basic storytelling better than adult men. To be honest, it makes me ashamed of my demographic.

Only reason they do this is because of PG era and T-shirt sales to kids.

Not the only reason, but yes, it is a big reason. Cena is the most marketable wrestler they have. And WWE are trying to make money. That's what businesses do, see?

However if they brought back rapper/amazing "Heel" Cena when he was actually cool in 2003, Cena would be LOVED by all fans(men/women/children). And T-shirt sales would go through the roof.

Right, rapping really appeals to children. That's why R-Truth is drawing paper like there's no tomorrow.

I wish Vince would realize this. I only own Cena's first word life shirt from 2003 or whatever it was. Cena made me LMAO every week on Smackdown. I looked forward to his rap every week. Then he went to RAW and stopped rapping, started smiling all the time and became super corny. He will never get my money until he becomes cool again.

If you were laughing at Cena's rapping, then you clearly have the mentality of a 15 year old. What was funny? Rhyming stuff with the word dick? Implying that wrestler's were gay? Yeah, that's top notch entertainment.

The only Shirts I have from wrestlers are from the cool bad*** ones. I have Stone Cold shirts, The Rock shirts, Cena's first shirt and CM Punks AMAZING shirts. Heck I got a Kurt Angle shirt with an American flag on it even though I am Canadian. I bought it to support Kurt because he was dah best back then.

...Did you just say "dah best"? Please tell me it was ironic.

This PG era needs to end. It's time to go back to the sensationalism of the Attitude era or the awesomeness of the Ruthless aggression era. Either one would generate a lot more money.

No, the resurrection of any era wouldn't make a lot more money. The numbers went in a consistent downward spiral during the Ruthless Aggression era. The Attitude Era would only appeal to young adult males. Children wouldn't care, men with an ounce of self-respect wouldn't care, and women wouldn't care. This isn't 1997. We're not living in some angry post-grunge pre-fight club era where twenty something generation Xers are lusting for mindless violence and shock value. We've evolved past that, thankfully.

WWE isn't a movie though. It's a weekly show with constant changes. You can't edit the script of a movie once it's already released. WWE can change where they want to go any minute.

I didn't say WWE is a movie. I just compared the two because WWE, like movies, are a visual narrative entertainment form. Maybe I'll simplify it for you, WWE is like scripted TV shows. You can't argue with that.

I was suggesting that the writers, Vince, or whoever might be booking Cena as heel to people like us who like to think we're in the know, and maybe as a face to the children.

Not really. If the writers cared that much what the Cena haters thought, he'd have turned heel 4 years ago.

It just kind of gets ridiculous with Cena sometimes, too ridiculous to just think that they're just being stupid.

Stupid how? By having their most marketable and hardworking wrestler be the face of the company?

Yeah. Ridiculous.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Here's the thing about John Cena's perceived unpopularity among fans. The majority of fans who genuinely don't like Cena are internet fans, that goes especially for some hardcore smarks. The IWC makes up only a pretty small percentage of the fanbase, but just because you're part of the IWC doesn't mean you hate Cena. The reason WWE continues to book Cena is a clear indicator that the negative opinions of Cena can't be applied to WWE as a whole. Cena continues to be the top merchandise mover for WWE and Cena's promo segments/matches are usually, not always but pretty damn close, the highest or second highest drawing parts of WWE television. If as many of the more mainstream or casual fans dislike Cena as some internet fans would like to think, he would've been booted out of the top spot in the company a long, long time ago. Also, despite the proclamations of dislike for Cena, look at how many of those same haters tune in and keep watching the guy.

I've been to various house shows and all the "Let's Go Cena, Cena Sucks" dueling chants have simply become the thing to do. At one point in time, they were a genuine concern because, obviously, a LOT of fans boo the guy participate in the "Cena Sucks" aspect of the chant. However, it all comes back to the numbers and the numbers simply tell a much different story than the anti-Cena chants would indicate. I've been to a lot of house shows and I've even seen people wearing John Cena gear doing the "Cena Sucks" chant ranging from kids, men & women while I've also seen kids, men & women participate in the "Let's Go Cena" side.

It MAY have been an indicator at one time, but it's devolved from that into being a traditional aspect of a John Cena match. If Cena puts on a strong match, you don't hear all that many boos even from those that supposedly hate the guy as they're too busy being entertained by the match. The level of boos will increase briefly when Cena goes into his "Five Moves of Doom" routine. However, if Cena wins and the match was entertaining, he'll get a lot of cheers.

Aside from being sort of the traditional thing to do in regards to Cena, I think some give the guy grief because he's simply the top guy. If he's the top guy, that means he's someone that's very much a favorite of management and a LOT of net fans eagerly accept any negative rumor, comment or story about Vince McMahon or WWE management as a whole as the gospel truth, so Cena's guilty by association. If Vince & Trips are backstabbing egotists who fuck talent over for shits and giggles, as various smark conspiracy theorists like to believe the, to them, that MUST mean that Cena is cut from the same cloth.

Don't get me wrong, I understand and agree with some of the frustrations people have with Cena. He's been on top soooooo consistently for soooooo long while being protected sooooo much that it's gotten stale, in my opinion and it's one I'm not alone in. At the same time, I also understand why he's still being pushed as the top guy and it's obviously because he's good for business. I simply don't believe the level of hate for the guy is anywhere near the level some anti-Cena fans would have everyone believe.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

Actually you are wrong. When Austin was there, he was the top guy. Rock only became the top guy after Austin had to take time off for his neck.

Undertaker was really never the top guy at any point.

There is a reason the WWE hasn't ever really had two top full time guys.

1) WWE can't create a top guy at will. So they never really have an abundance of top faces unless the guys themselves are good.

2) This is the biggest reason, one person ultimately becomes more popular than everyone else.

I'm sure WWE would have loved having multiple guys with Cena's popularity but that isn't something they can create. Guys can get very hot and near Cena's level but staying at that level is incredibly hard.


Back on topic.
Jim Ross has talked about this before and he actually made a really good point. If the point of a heel is to make the crowd hate them so much they want to see him get killed and the point of a face is to make the crowd love them so much they want to see him win, isn't Cena already doing both.

If you look strictly at his character, then Cena is not a heel. But if you look at the point of heels and faces, he is both. People will watch and hope Cena gets destroyed. While other people will watch and hope Cena overcomes whatever is thrown at him.

There's a difference between being the "top guy" and being "THE guy who's carrying the company".

 

[Creepy Old Man]

Cena's a babyface. WWE clearly wants the crowds to cheer him 100%, which is why he panders to them and often wins them over. Vince McMahon is out of touch and not savvy enough to have Cena be some kind of uber clever heel character that is covertly screwing with our minds.

 

[therockiswwf]

There's a difference between being the "top guy" and being "THE guy who's carrying the company".

During the Attitude Era, Austin carried the company. He was the main reason WWE turned the war around (not the overall reason they won the war, if that makes sense).

If Punk was still with them and Bryan wasn't injured, they would have 3 top faces helping carry them. But Cena would still be the top one. Cena isn't carrying the company by himself because WWE wants him to be the only guy, the other two top guys aren't competing due to circumstances beyond WWE's control. They can't just pull 2 more guys up when 2 of the top 3 faces aren't there anymore.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

During the Attitude Era, Austin carried the company. He was the main reason WWE turned the war around (not the overall reason they won the war, if that makes sense).

If Punk was still with them and Bryan wasn't injured, they would have 3 top faces helping carry them. But Cena would still be the top one. Cena isn't carrying the company by himself because WWE wants him to be the only guy, the other two top guys aren't competing due to circumstances beyond WWE's control. They can't just pull 2 more guys up when 2 of the top 3 faces aren't there anymore.

In other words you can't differentiate between being the top guy and "carrying" the company. All I need to know, since there's no point in having a discussion if you can't make that basic distinction.

 

[therockiswwf]

In other words you can't differentiate between being the top guy and "carrying" the company. All I need to know, since there's no point in having a discussion if you can't make that basic distinction.

I'm just stuck on the part where you said no one was the top guy.

When you had multiple guys like Austin/Rock/Undertaker/ect collectively carrying the company and no one guy was THE guy.

Which NEVER happened. Austin was the guy. Austin also carried the company until mid to late 1999. By then the supporting cast had gotten strong enough to help Austin carry it (and to finally allow him to fix his neck). Austin was THE guy when he came back. There was no point in which Rock, Austin, Taker all collectively carried the WWE with no one guy being the guy.

I have never felt like Cena ever had to carry the WWE by himself for any significant amount of time (which is not a knock on Cena).

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

Which NEVER happened.

A gratuitous assertion that can be equally gratuitously denied.

Austin was the guy. Austin also carried the company until mid to late 1999. By then the supporting cast had gotten strong enough to help Austin carry it (and to finally allow him to fix his neck). Austin was THE guy when he came back. There was no point in which Rock, Austin, Taker all collectively carried the WWE with no one guy being the guy.

I have never felt like Cena ever had to carry the WWE by himself for any significant amount of time (which is not a knock on Cena).

^^^^^ Assuming the age on you info is correct then you weren't even watching during the Attitude Era.....but I knew that anyway given this post you just made.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

This may sound stupid at first but think about it.

John Cena is always constantly being booked to win, and even when he loses it's almost always though some elaborate, over the top, unclean finish. Obviously that gets really annoying to most fans, which is why he gets booed by at least half of every crowd.

I don't think it is most fans but it clearly bothers a lot of fans. Go on.

So why would WWE constantly book Cena this way if it has negative effects on the product?He's not going to gain any more fans by winning constantly. The kids aren't going to love him more than they already do.

Kids are not born fans. Those of us who have procreated will tell you that children are not born with multi colored wrist bands and t-shirts. There is always a new crop of kids flipping channels or talking to friends or surveying a supermarket magazine rack for something cool. What they find is Cena. Cena is a gateway drug to WWE for kids. His number one priority is not to get more love, it is to find new love.

I believe that WWE does this to purposely piss off fans. They want us to hate John Cena, and Cena wants us to hate him too. That's why guys like HHH and Cena poke fun at "internet fans", because they're freaking heels.

They don't care. These fans that hate Cena come to the shows regardless of how much they hate him. They just sit back and laugh at how some people claim to hate the product but still give them their money. It really is nonsensical, no?

Cena comes out every week, says the same thing no matter the situation and refuses to change anything about himself.

While I don't agree that he says the same thing every week, doesn't it make more sense for a grown adult to never change? Are you telling me that all of the sudden I am supposed to believe that Kane can go from psychotic fan friendly demon to corrupt corporate middle management to psychotic bad guy demon but it doesn't make sense that Cena stays a good guy?

He's always politically correct and he has almost no personality./quote]

Besides maybe Jerry Lawler, in the past five years, what face is politically incorrect? In the PG Era do we have many wrestlers at all that have been politically incorrect (I guess Colter and maybe Punk during his heel run)?

He will bury your favorite wrestlers and/or latch onto their popularity if they are liked more than he

You do realize that he is an employee just doing his job. He is not the booker. Don't you think if Cena was going out and burying talent, Vince would put a stop to it?

He does make a wish and then uses it to try to get you to "like him". You are supposed to hate this guy.

Again he is an employee, not the producer of the show. Vince wants to feature Cena's charity, is Cena supposed to tell him "absolutely not". And how is featuring good deeds helping your " heel" argument? Are you so dissatisfied with your own accomplishments in life seeing others makes you feel bad?

WWE is using the internet to their advantage. They know what we're saying in general so they incorporate it into story line. This is the reality era right? So they put stuff out there that only the adults will notice so that we can hate Cena, but it's not as obvious to the children so they can still sell merchandise to them.

You give Vince and HHH way too much credit but I am sure they appreciate the thought.

I think it really kicked in when Cena beat Rock at WM. Cena defeated our childhood favorite then came out to gloat the next night on Raw. He even threw a "heel turn" jab at us.

Cena made a joke so that makes him a heel? You take wrestling way too seriously.

Thing is though, I feel like he did turn heel. He turned heel by not turning heel. I know how ridiculous that sounds but just ponder it for a minute. His heel character is that he's the face of the WWE. Not that he's a baby face like Bo Dallas. But THE face of the company that won't give anyone else a chance and that refuses to change even a little, that's his heel character.

If we look at it that way then he will probably beat Lesnar at Summerslam. Either that or lose to Lesnar in dirty fashion. Maybe he beats Lesnar then gets destroyed by Brock after the match and Seth Rollins cashes in MITB to take the title. Why? So that Cena can win it back and tie Ric Flairs record and eventually surpass it. We would all watch and hate it because most of us don't think he deserves that.

If that's the way they play it, then they should never "officially" turn Cena heel. Keep him the way he is and he will be a natural heel in the eyes of fans. The big pay off could be having someone like Roman Reigns or Daniel Bryan beat him clean next WM.

But anyway, what do you guys think? Am I totally out of my mind? Or am I just kinda crazy?

You are kinda crazy. Cena is a face. Just because some people don't like him doesn't make him a heel.

 

[therockiswwf]

A gratuitous assertion that can be equally gratuitously denied.




^^^^^ Assuming the age on you info is correct then you weren't even watching during the Attitude Era.....but I knew that anyway given this post you just made.

I did watch during it. I was 5 when I started watching (1999).

I did go back and watched the entire year of 1999 (which actually sucked thanks to Russo) a few years ago (had to get a couple of surgeries which left me with a lot of free time). I know mostly what happened in the other AE years.

Anyways Rock wasn't fully above upper midcard until very late 1999/early 2000. Austin absolutely overshadowed Rock before that. From 98-late 99 Austin was far above everyone else. In 00-01, when Austin was there, he still overshadowed everyone.

Rock became the guy in 2000 but when Austin came back it was clear Austin was still much bigger than Rock. The sole reason Rock even got to be the top guy was because Austin had to take time off.

98 - Top guy clearly is Austin.
99 - Still Austin.
00 - Rock. Until Austin came back.
Early 01 (end of AE) - Austin.

There always was a top guy during the AE. You said that Austin, Rock, Taker, etc all were collectively equal and none of them were THE guy. Which isn't true. Without the neck injury forcing him to take time off, it would have always been Austin.

Here is a good reference point, what was the selling point of Backlash 2000? Was it Rock vs HHH for the WWE title? Nope. Was it to see Rock finally overcoming the McMahons? Nope. It was that Austin would be in Rock's corner. The selling point to Rock's huge win was that Austin would show up. When Austin eventually did show up, his pop was bigger than Rock's.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

I did watch during it. I was 5 when I started watching (1999).

I did go back and watched the entire year of 1999 (which actually sucked thanks to Russo) a few years ago (had to get a couple of surgeries which left me with a lot of free time). I know mostly what happened in the other AE years.

Anyways Rock wasn't fully above upper midcard until very late 1999/early 2000. Austin absolutely overshadowed Rock before that. From 98-late 99 Austin was far above everyone else. In 00-01, when Austin was there, he still overshadowed everyone.

Rock became the guy in 2000 but when Austin came back it was clear Austin was still much bigger than Rock. The sole reason Rock even got to be the top guy was because Austin had to take time off.

98 - Top guy clearly is Austin.
99 - Still Austin.
00 - Rock. Until Austin came back.
Early 01 (end of AE) - Austin.

There always was a top guy during the AE. You said that Austin, Rock, Taker, etc all were collectively equal and none of them were THE guy. Which isn't true. Without the neck injury forcing him to take time off, it would have always been Austin.

Here is a good reference point, what was the selling point of Backlash 2000? Was it Rock vs HHH for the WWE title? Nope. Was it to see Rock finally overcoming the McMahons? Nope. It was that Austin would be in Rock's corner. The selling point to Rock's huge win was that Austin would show up. When Austin eventually did show up, his pop was bigger than Rock's.

^^^^^ Which proves yet again that you can't differentiate between someone being "the top guy" and someone who's "carrying the company". Thanks for making it clear once again that you're incapable of making that simple distinction.

 

[KettleFace]

My god it's not a hard concept to fucking grasp, the guy is a face. Just because a lot of people dislike him it doesn't make him a heel at all. The distinction between the two is and always has been quite clear.

 

[therockiswwf]

^^^^^ Which proves yet again that you can't differentiate between someone being "the top guy" and someone who's "carrying the company". Thanks for making it clear once again that you're incapable of making that simple distinction.

Oh wait now I get what you meant. You said no one was THE guy. As in, there was more than one guy carrying the company. However you did not phrase it that way.

You said "... collectively carrying the company and no one guy was THE guy."

I got confused by your grammar.