John Cena is the best wrestler ever.

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

vs CM Punk (MITB '11, Summerslam '11, RAW 2013, NoC '12)
vs Daniel Bryan (Summerslam '13)
vs Kevin Owens (Elimination Chamber '15, MITB '15, Battleground '15)
vs Seth Rollins (Summerslam '15)
vs AJ Styles (MITB '16, Summerslam '16, Royal Rumble '17)
vs HBK (Wrestlemania 23, RAW)
vs Cesaro (RAW)
vs Bobby Lashley (TGAB '07)
vs Edge (Unforgiven '06, Backlash '09)
vs Brock Lesnar (Extreme Rules '12)
vs JBL (JD '05)
vs Umaga (Royal Rumble '07)
vs Brock Lesnar vs Seth Rollins (Royal Rumble '15)

Here are IMO the best John Cena matches of all time. About 20. Classic matches.

People are going to say "yes but he's going up against great wrestlers that carry him. NO. He doesn't. He's actually the one carrying them. Because in reality, if you put any of them against each other, they won't be able to deliver us the same magic a Cena match does. Some of them would, but just a few.

John Cena is the wrestler with the most complete look ever.

He can wrestle at the same level of wrestlers like HBK and AJ Styles. He might not be as athletic as them, but he will do anything to surpass them during the match. His work ethic and the limits that he reaches during his big matches are unbelievable. Unlike all the other wrestlers, who just go in there and just do their thing, Cena does something else. He constantly tries to outwrestle his opponent. He realizes the level his opponent is at and goes for one level above that. Nobody else does that. Nobody tries to outwrestle their oppnent.

Mic skills? One of the best ever. He knows how to sell a match, he knows how to sell a crowd, how to act, how to entertain and how to captivate a crowd with his work.

Build? I'd say near perfect. His build allows him to be both strong, fast and athletic at the same time.

Marketing? He's the #1 for a reason. He breathes WWE. Nobody else before him did that. Everybody had their own personal agenda. Everybody had their egotistical look to the bussiness. Hogan would never accept a squash from Lesnar, or a clean loss to Styles, or to Bryan, or Punk, or Batista, at a time where Batista was competing with Cena for the #1 spot. Cena would never dump a match like Austin did with Hogan at WM 18, or with Lesnar. The only other person that didn't really care about his personal position was The Rock but The Rock also had another dream and that's acceptable.

Love him or hate him, John Cena is every wrestling producer's wet dream. Not just Vince's. Everybody would love to have a John Cena. He can do anything. Go and have 5-star match? Sure. Go and do 100 charities and 100 talk shows? Sure. Go and wrestle in a mixed tag match while another wrestler is taking your spot as the #1 guy at Wrestlemania? Sure.

We are lucky to live in the era of John Cena and Vince was lucky to have found John Cena, because I don't think he'll ever get another wrestler like John Cena.

Cena is often blamed for being the face of an unpopular era, but, is that really his fault? I mean, was there anybody else? Was there anyone else WWE had? No.

HHH, Undertaker and HBK were old and fans were tired of them. Angle left in 2006 and Batista was never fond of the marketing thing. Orton was a jackass and Edge wasn't really cut for the face of the company spot. So, who else was there from 2005-2007 that WWE could have used?

Right now, there are talents that could take the spot of the #1 guy outside of Roman Reigns. But back then, there really wasn't anybody else.

Stone Cold often says that the current generation isn't competitive enough, but, we have so many guys that could become the #1 guy. Everybody does marketing, everybody delivers great matches and moments, everybody does talk shows and everybody is pretty decent on the mic. Rollins, Ambrose, Reigns, Owens, Styles, Miz. For me, these guys are all equals.

But back then, Cena just raised above everybody.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I don't know who the best wrestler ever is, but you don't hear the best wrestler ever loudly calling spots.

 

[Kidpolean]

Cena is easily one of the best to ever wrestle. I don't think that there is any logical argument that can be made against that. I never understood why he is so hated. He is amazing on the mic and consistently puts on great matches.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Cena is easily one of the best to ever wrestle. I don't think that there is any logical argument that can be made against that. I never understood why he is so hated. He is amazing on the mic and consistently puts on great matches.

I agree he's one of the best but you'll find no shortage of fans who'll go out of their way to say the opposite and logic often has little, if anything, to do with their arguments.

Every wrestler has his or her weaknesses and strengths, there's no "perfect" wrestler so there are always some sort of legit fault or faults that can be highlighted by someone making a counterargument. In the case of Cena, what you often have in his case are his shortcomings being exaggerated, sometimes to obscene degrees, or little things that are nitpicked to the point where it comes off as trollish. For instance, Cena isn't the greatest technical or mat based guy, he's not especially graceful on the top rope and he throws one of the ugliest dropkicks in all of wrestling history. Some who hate Cena like to go on about the "Five Moves of Doom" while purposely ignoring that every wrestler has a small handful of signature moves that they use in every match, or they'll go on that he "can't wrestle" because he doesn't flip or perform a dozen variations of a suicide dive every match he's in. That's not to say that Cena can't do some mat stuff well and his lack of grace on the top doesn't prevent the few times he goes up to the top from being pretty entertaining. What's probably Cena's biggest strength is he knows how to connect with fans, he knows how to tell a story and has a deep understanding of in-ring psychology. In those ways, Cena MIGHT very well truly be the best there's ever been and those are important.

Cena has shown over the years that not only can he wrestle, but he's among the best at it. He's had far too many great matches with too broad a variety of opponents over too many years to not be. I don't know that he's the best but, as I said, faults can be found in anybody and I don't really worry about the old "my favorite guy's better than your favorite guy in a match" arguments; to me, they're right up there with stuff like whether or not Superman can beat the Hulk. The answer to both arguments is the same: it depends on who has the creative say so.

 

[ilapierre]

Cena is easily one of the best to ever wrestle. I don't think that there is any logical argument that can be made against that. I never understood why he is so hated. He is amazing on the mic and consistently puts on great matches.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But 'kidpolean' don't 'kid' yourself. If you wanted to state that WWE booked John Cena stronger than any wrestler in WWE history then you could have a point. But to lump Cena into a sentence with words like 'best' and 'to ever wrestle' is crazy. Cena is definitely one of the better wrestling 'entertainers' of the past 15 years. But a majority of wrestling fans will remind you that the past 15 years of wrestling entertainment has lacked bona fide main eventers. All one has to do is review the history of wrestling or revisit wrestling's heyday to see that Cena's just a bland substitute for a superstar in today's charisma-lacking abyss.

As for JackHammer always trying to dictate to us things that are obviously untrue, listen up bro. John Cena is loyal to the company, dependable, consistent. He is a company-first guy. That's where he is the 'best'. But when it comes to entertaining an audience, the video footage doesn't lie. For years half the audience has been 'booing' him and not because he's a great heel. They boo him because he's all 'push' and very little anything else. He's not organically the best. And, in my opinion, the best all time wrestlers were pushed because the fans fell in love with their charisma and talent. Daniel Bryan or CM Punk are perfect examples of workers from this lame era who could have potentially been the 'best ever'.

 

[Spencesc11]

Very solid career but in terms of greatest ever it's hard for anyone in my opinion to ever surpass Ric Flair. Flair was the ultimate heel and put over so many faces over the years to elevate his brand. So many classic matches it's ridiculous. John Cena may go down as one of the all time greats but not the best of all time.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

Hard to argue against Cena for one of the greatest of all time. Constantly in MOTY candidates, 16 time World Champion, number one guy in the company for about 15 years, merchandise champion, hero to the kids, inspiration to the kids, unmatchable on the microphone. Love him or hate him, the crowd is never quiet during a John Cena match. He brings a big match feel to the product and now that he's part time, it'll be even more special when he shows up and has a big match with somebody.

You could put Cena along side a Bruno Sammartino, Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan comfortably IMO given the difference in eras too. (Hulkamania, Flair and Bruno did it without the benefit of the internet ) so there's one major benefit Cena had over other greats from the past and that's the only knock against him.

I'm not even the biggest Cena fan either but he's got to be in the top 5 of all time on any list.

 

[AnthonyM4]

Anybody who says Cena can't wrestle is on some serious drugs. However, the reason the guy is hated is because of his character. I mean that's why the adults/smarks don't like him. Now they should though. I think he's done more than enough to earn our respect. Rarely has he had a bad match in the last 7 years. The Wrestlemania 27 main event sucked, but since then you can probably count on one hand how many bad matches he's had.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

I have a theory on why people hate him. Because when he started out in the first few years, he absolutely sucked in the ring. He was awkward as hell and his matches stunk, but he still got pushed. That's when a pile of his haters started, back when he was shit in the ring but still got pushed.

 

[OYDK]

I have a theory on why people hate him. Because when he started out in the first few years, he absolutely sucked in the ring. He was awkward as hell and his matches stunk, but he still got pushed. That's when a pile of his haters started, back when he was shit in the ring but still got pushed.

It's funny though because it's not like he was pushed despite being constantly boo'ed. Other than possibly Batista, Cena was the hottest thing going in the WWE in late 04 throughout 05. It's not like Roman Reigns where Vince and Co. were adamant on shoving him down people's throats even though a large portion of the audience clearly didn't want him from the start. The guy was insanely over before his mega-push began. Once the tide began to turn, the fans had nobody but themselves to blame for his success.

As for the greatest ever argument, he's certainly worthy of being discussed along with the likes of Austin, Hogan, Flair, etc. Is he the greatest all-around wrestler of all time as OP is seemingly trying to state? That's debatable. Shawn Michaels was one of the greatest in-ring performers of all time, could hold his own with anyone on the mic, and was extremely marketable. Austin had classics with a variety of opponents, killed it every single week on the mic, and was probably the most popular wrestler ever. Flair's the same. Ego honestly has nothing to do with greatness. Cena may very well be the most selfless face of the company ever, but to argue that it makes him "better" than the other greats is kind of laughable.

Let's not overstate it. When it comes down to it, there were those who were more popular, there were those who were better pure performers, and there were those who could, at the very least, hang on the mic with him. And there were those who were just as much the complete package as John Cena. I don't think I could personally ever consider Cena the greatest of all time, but, when you take everything into consideration (longevity, 16-time World champion, along with everything else already mentioned), it would be a stretch to not consider him one of the top 5 ever.

 

[FromGlasgow]

I don't agree with Cena, He was on top for a lengthy period of time but he was on top during the least popular era in wrestling that I can remember in my lifetime.
He couldn't carry the company on his own like others in the past as the WWE had to rely on part timers to sell the biggest events.
Personally I would go with Hogan as greatest of all time, I don't believe wrestling would be half as popular today and would be in a very different place if it wasn't for Hogan, Difficult to imagine the early Wrestlemania's without Hogan. Whether you like him or not its hard to argue with the effect he had on wrestling but maybe thats because I grew up in the 80's, Maybe if you grew up in the 70's Sammartino would be the greatest of all time.
Its impossible to judge a definative greatest wrestler of all time because ultimately it just comes down to opinion, Its not like other sports where you can count a genuine win loss record but wrestling has so many other factors including the ability to have great matches, sell, Getting over, Promotion of matches, Interview skills etc than just how many wins.

 

[#hamler]

Definitely hard to argue against it. Impossible to deny John Cena's contributions to the WWE and his longevity on top of the world's biggest wrestling promotion is absolutely unheard of. Hogan, Austin and Rock had roughly the same amount of time on top collectively as John Cena single handedly. He's headlined numerous Wrestlemanias and is without a doubt still a big draw. With that I can't help but wonder if longevity equates success.

Would John Cena had survived in the Attitude Era? His work ethic would have certainly made him a stand out but a successful stand out above colorful/edgy characters like Steve Austin, Rock, Mankind, Kane, Undertaker and DX? John Cena is certainly better than the current crop of WWE superstars but he doesn't stand a chance in other eras. I can't help but believe his success is due to not having anybody near his level for so many years.

But top five? Most definitely.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

No one can say John Cena is not a good wrestler. Watch any of the matches listed in this thread, and that's pretty much undeniable.

However around 2007-2008, his character had gotten extremely stale, and he was in desperate need of change. Eight years later? Still the same old stuff.

No one wants the clean cut babyface who always overcomes the odds. Cena was that for 10 years.

So yes he's a tremendous wrestler, but there's no wonder why so many people disliked him for all those years.

 

[Khalifa]

As for JackHammer always trying to dictate to us things that are obviously untrue,

now that you mention it! Damn you JH, you government POS. Trying to make us think John Cena is the best and other ludicrous statements that aren’t shared by anyone else.

listen up bro.

After your first sentence, I can only read this in a Vince Russo voice, “Let me tell you this bro”.

That's where he is the 'best'. But when it comes to entertaining an audience, the video footage doesn't lie. For years half the audience has been 'booing' him and not because he's a great heel. They boo him because he's all 'push' and very little anything else.

Then how could you explain no one even gettin close to Cena in sales for majority of his career. Just because you have try hards wanting to go against the gain doesn’t mean anything, no one sells more than John Cena and personally everyone I have talked to has liked or likes John Cena, WZ and other internet places are the only places that don’t like Cena. You will never meet a Cena hater in real life, it’s like Santa Claus.

He's not organically the best. And, in my opinion, the best all time wrestlers were pushed because the fans fell in love with their charisma and talent.

Did you not watch wrestling in 2004? WrestleMania 20 Is a perfect example. The crowd went off then like they did every time Cena came out. If the WWE wasn’t split in two where John Cena was forced to be in the main event 24/7 then maybe he could’ve had a fairytale run like Austin, but the fact he has had to be at the top for the past 13 years shouldn’t mean we should hate John Cena at all, especially after what he did during those periods. John Cena was the biggest thing in WWE before mid 2006. More hot than Mysterio, Batista, Jeff Hardy etc. gotta remember John Cena was in the US title picture until Wrestlemania 21, so 3 years of killing it before moving up. The grown men are just dicks to John Cena but if you go back to Royal Rumble 2008 when he returns and I bet you don’t find many bigger reactions than that in history.

Daniel Bryan or CM Punk are perfect examples of workers from this lame era who could have potentially been the 'best ever'.

Many fans still believe they are, but you’re right, they aren’t in the main tier. Maybe not Austin/Rock/Hogan/Cena tier but potentially a 1B tier. To be honest though what does CM Punk have over John Cena apart from being against anything corporate? 10 years ago I wouldn’t of said it but now I will, John Cena is better than CM Punk in the ring at least he has been since the US open challenge was out, and the thing I like most about Cena than CM Punk is that Cenas strikes look like they would hurt, not tickle ya like CM Punks would. Cena is better on the mic, Cena looks more like a wrestler. I could go on and on.

To me John Cena is the best ever. I don’t have that special connections with The Rock and Austin like everyone else does, mine is Sting and Goldberg because I was a WCW boy so my opinion might not be the greatest but I haven’t seen anyone do it better or longer than Cena.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

John Cena has everything a more the greatest wrestler needs to have but there's one thing missing. Impact. Austin, Hogan, Sammartino, Rock, Flair, HBK. All of these guys made an impact. Cena hasn't. I don't know however if that's Cena fault.

And IMO, Cena may have not made an impact to this bussiness, but he's done something bigger. He's helping wrestling evolve.
Austin and Hogan never put over younger, fresher talents. They were gone before the new era begun. Rock put over Lesnar and left. HBK put over Austin and left.

On the other hand, John Cena has been trying constantly to give the spotlight to new talents, to new faces. To pass the torch. And for that only he has my respect. I even consider this, far greater than making an impact for a short period of time. Because he's helping build up the future.
The only other guy that did that was Flair, because Flair was a heel. HBK started doing this after his time had passed.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Cena never misses an opportunity to put down a superstar he's having a verbal confrontation with. There's also a difference between losing and putting somebody over.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I mean you can defeat people and still put them over, but it's very rare that Cena doesn't come back at some point with his axe.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I really couldn't stand Cena until 2011/12, but that was mainly a preference thing. Cena will finish up at somewhere around the top five of all time. Been on top forever, has had great matches and is a great talker, especially between 2011 and now. Outside of Hulk, Austin, Rock and Flair, I can't think of someone with a better resume. Guys like Andre, Bruno, Taker, HBK, and Bret (and several others I can't think of now) are close and possibly equal, but not ahead of him. I don't think he can pass the other four, at least not in my mind, but top five is fantastic.

And I don't care about him not putting others over. Every top guy, ever, has done the same thing.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

Cena never misses an opportunity to put down a superstar he's having a verbal confrontation with. There's also a difference between losing and putting somebody over.

Who hasn't, throughout wrestling history, not put down his opponent on the mic?

At least he takes the fall. How many more falls does he need to take? Nakamura, Reigns, Strowman, Owens, Styles, Bryan, Ambrose. I'm starting to lose count of Cena's clean loses as the face of the company.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

He will never beat Hogan because Hogan was the greatest baby face of one era, and the greatest heel of another.

Otherwise, totally valid claim to being the best ever.

 

[Bernkastel]

Cena is the greatest performer of the current era, but of all time? Nah, that's a bit of a stretch. I don't think he's quite top 10 material personally, but I'd be comfortable ranking him in my top 15. The biggest career asset that Cena has had that many of his contemporaries do not is longevity. Longevity at the top of the card. Triple H and Undertaker are close, but neither of them have been the main event headliner, the box office draw, or possessed the marketability that Cena does. Neither of them have been the face of the WWE, and really pro wrestling as a whole, for as long as he has. Austin and Rock were arguably bigger box office attractions, but they don't have Cena's longevity. If I were to measure just the WWE's history, I'd probably rank Cena #4 behind Bruno, Hogan, and Austin.

No matter where anyone chooses to place the man on an all time list, Cena is going to be remembered as one of the greatest pro wrestlers of all time. That can't be denied.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

At least he takes the fall. How many more falls does he need to take?

Less. And when he does have ithe mean something.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Who hasn't, throughout wrestling history, not put down his opponent on the mic?

At least he takes the fall. How many more falls does he need to take? Nakamura, Reigns, Strowman, Owens, Styles, Bryan, Ambrose. I'm starting to lose count of Cena's clean loses as the face of the company.

Well then you cant count very high, because its less than 20


And it really doesn't matter if you lose clean to someone and then come back and beat them 19 straight times. Instead of clean losses, we should be discussing people who came out the other end of an angle with Cena better for it (what they went on to do afterwards) and that count is considerably less than 20.


Wether this is even applicable to a greatness discussion is also debateable, but I figured I would weigh in with some facts.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Wether this is even applicable to a greatness discussion is also debateable, but I figured I would weigh in with some facts.

Debatable is generous at best. How they're booked beyond Cena has nothing to do with him. And they're certainly under the spotlight and given a chance to shine while working with him.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

Well then you cant count very high, because its less than 20


And it really doesn't matter if you lose clean to someone and then come back and beat them 19 straight times. Instead of clean losses, we should be discussing people who came out the other end of an angle with Cena better for it (what they went on to do afterwards) and that count is considerably less than 20.


Wether this is even applicable to a greatness discussion is also debateable, but I figured I would weigh in with some facts.

Who came out looking better after an angle with Austin or Hogan? Nobody, ever.

And what 19 times are you talking about?

Cena is 2-2 wih Punk from 2011-2014, plus one draw.
0-1 to Bryan.
1-2 to Styles.
0-1 to Reigns.
And got squashed by Lesnar.

He lost to HHH, JBL and Batista in three PPVs in a row back in 2008, while in his peak. Actually his entire 2008 until Survivor Series was loses only, outside the Rumble victory.

Sure there are some questionable victories, like Extreme Rules 2012, but I think Cena has done a pretty fair deal in putting over stars when it counts.

Cena is actually the only "face of the company" that loses so much.