Legitimate reasons not to push "over" stars?

[boywithbluehanger]

This is something that's been plaguing my mind for a few years in regards to the WWE. I and many people on these boards have expressed confusion as to the company's decisions to not immediately push guys into being individual champions immediately after the crowd latches onto them. Over the past 2 years a few men come to mind in this scenario:

- Daniel Bryan was embraced later in 2011 and did eventually become a champion. However, the moment after his stardom took off at WM28, he was soon diverted onto lesser things than the WHC and for a year now, he's been delegated to the Tag Team Division which he isn't even being used as a spark to help other struggling tag teams get over.

- Zack Ryder spent much of 2011 using his free time to help get his unused character face time via youtube. He gained a cult following that translated well into this era of WWE family-friendly programming and was well received by everyone! By the time it finally seemed as if he was getting pushed onto TV regularly, they (kinda literally) buried him.

- Ryback started off sort of lukewarm with the crowd but after weeks of him incessantly shouting out , "WAKE UP!!", "FINISH HIM!!"(later changed to "FINISH IT!!" probably to avoid legal drama with Midway Games) and "FEED! ME! MORE!", one of the sayings finally caught on and arenas were finally in unison with their interest. Then for whatever reason, when Ryback finally crossed paths with the WWE's biggest heel at the time in CM Punk, they had an opportunity. CM Punk's reign VS Ryback's winning streak. But because of the obvious corner they painted themselves into, they decided that Ryback's streak was of less worth than Punk's title reign. (Bad decision imo) And after that, they felt the need to continue this trend of Ryback losing at PPVs in hopes to make all of this look like a part of a growing storyline where Ryback can win all matches except for the big ones. In turn, they've killed his momentum and any real reason to stay invested in him after so much crowd support.

Is there a legitimate reason why these heavily fan-supported men don't get championship pushes during the height of their popularity? It worked for Sheamus in 2009. He became a heel that everyone (including smarks) booed in live audiences. I'd like to read anyone else's thoughts as to why the WWE recently doesn't immediately push proven men who are popular into singles championship pictures.

 

[Jonyboyuk2]

The problem is - Daniel Bryan is good enough to get himself over. He learned from the best (HBK) and performed to audiences all around the world. He knows what gets himself over.

Ryback is a massive dude who will get over in the same way Mark Henry is. Ryback has lost every PPV match he has been in this year - he is not being accepted as a huge threat to Cena for a few reasons. He is unlikely to beat Cena in Cena's first wwe championship feud after winning the belt. And he lost to Mark Henry just before the Cena feud. He will be pushed but it will take a lot to get Ryback over.

Ryder - his start and stop push damaged him. he has to change gimmick and move with the times. maybe a heel turn where he is super aggressive would work. If he is a great worker he will relish the chance to change it up.

Lets look finally at Ziggler, His start stop start stop push damaged him but he eventually remained so over with the crowed because he was so good. He knew how to work the audience. That he cashed in on Raw when the Crowd was at fever pitch only helped (am sure WWE did not expect it or plan it that way - they got lucky).

Not everyone can be The Rock or Stone Cold but if people believe in a character- then it makes their jobs of entertaining easier.

 

[MCMG]

I'm sure the WWE know what they are doing regarding these type of guys. They will only push someone if they are worthy and will be sustainable at the top. The Ryder phase has died down. I think everyone just got bored of him quite quickly. Lets say they give Fandango the world title over the summer and everyone stops "fandangoing" and saying his name. The WWE and Johnny Curtis would have to completely re-build his career knowing he has already been world champ. Surely more damage has been done than good.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Ryback was on fire, and then WWE had to put him in the feud with CM Punk for the title. He wasn't ready, and constantly losing and being beaten up by The Shield put a huge dent in Ryback's momentum. Yes, each lost wasn't clean, and the screwy finishes were suppose to preserve Ryback's credibility as a monster, but fact of the matter is he still lost each time. After a while, the fans had no reason at all to believe in Ryback having a legit shot to take the title from Punk, and Punk's looming Royal Rumble match with The Rock didn't help anything. Everyone with a half brain knew Punk wasn't going to drop the title on the road to the Rumble, because a year long+ WWE Champion CM Punk facing and dropping the strap to Rock at the Rumble was a foregone conclusion.

And the night after Wrestlemania, WWE pulls the trigger on a heel turn. Too soon, because Ryback was starting to regain some momentum as a face. To make things worse, WWE illogically throws Ryback into a WWE Championship match with Cena at Extreme Rules. I'm in the camp of people, who thought Ryback's promo against Foley was absolutely horrendous. Shouting "FEED ME MORE!" or "WAKE UP!" during his entrance is one thing, but Ryback isn't a fluent talker, and it's painfully obvious. Ryback was better off and more entertaining, when he was destroying skinny jobbers with ridiculous names. He's just better as a monster, who's out to destroy everything in his path. From what I can see right now, the persona of being a dick heel, who wears a leather jacket and a skull cup doesn't fit him, at all.

Zack Ryder, eh? I think it's safe to say Ryder was just a fad now. Yeah, you could make the argument WWE went out of their way to make Ryder look like a bitch during the Rise Above Hate storyline with Cena, Eve, and Kane. BUT everyone suffers setbacks, and you can only cling to the excuse of one failed storyline for so long. Fact is, Ryder looks like a comedy character, or jobber, and he's treated as such 99% of the time. Think about it, when's the last time Zack Ryder really blew you away or caught your attention with his work in the ring or on the mic? He'll still get some nice pops from smarky crowds every now and then, but you have to remember, these are the same type of people, who like to be jackasses, while cheering for "cool" heels.

 

[The Perfect Max]

I can understand what you are saying, but I think CM Punk is very similar to the likes of Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler. I think it is a matter of timing and following. CM Punk has come closest to surpassing John Cena, and at one point he did. I doubt Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler could have done this.

In reference to these two again, their best years are still ahead of them. Bryan, as soon as Team Hell No is done, will be put back into the World Heavyweight Championship picture with Ziggler. This is a must-see feud that a lot of people are longing for, and together they will push each other.

I think WWE do realise they need more stars. John Cena will be around about 6 to 7 more years, CM Punk doesn't want to stay much longer, and Randy Orton needs a character change; his contract ends in 2019 I believe. WWE look to be pushing Dolph Ziggler, and Daniel Bryan will be on his way. Guys like Antonio Cesaro, Cody Rhodes, Damien Sandow, Ryback and The Shield are the future. NXT has some good looking talent.

WWE realise they are in desperate need of big stars, and now they have begun the phase of bringing in and nurturing new talent.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

I'll argue that Daniel Bryan has been kept relevant (as well as Kane) via the Team Hell No gimmick. Both of them get great pops, their promos have gotten better and better, and as of right now, they're both in the hottest feud going post-Wrestlemania. Daniel Bryan's doing just fine.

With Ryback, you have to remember that Cena got injured prior to Hell in the Cell and they made a hasty move to put Ryback in the Main Event. The problem is that they also had committed to having the Rock come back and win the title to set up the Cena/Rock rematch was Wrestlemania. That ended up straight jacketing what they could do with Ryback. The other problem is that Ryback, himself, is having trouble getting over.

Sometimes a slow roll is the way to go. Fandango, for example, may stay over with the crowd, but right now there's no reason to push him too hard too fast.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I suppose one reason, and it's a legit reason in my opinion, is that WWE is interested in pushing wrestlers who are ultimately able to deliver for them in the long run. In order to find that out, it simply takes time. Vince was taught a major lesson with Brock Lesnar when he gave him the push of all pushes. Within 3 months to the day Lesnar debuted on WWE television, he was WWE Champion. He was given huge wins over everyone from Cena to Rock to Big Show to even The Undertaker, not to mention a huge paycheck. But, 17 months later, he was out the door. Did that have more to do with Lesnar's simple lack of passion than his ability? Probably so, but commitment is no less important than ability. It takes time to see whether someone has enough of both, at least in their opinions, to really be elevated.

For example, it's been about 1.5 years since Daniel Bryan won the World Heavyweight Championship. He spent the first half of 2012 either as World Heavyweight Champion or #1 contender for the WWE Championship. As part of Team Hell No, Bryan has helped make tag team wrestling and the tag titles more interesting than they've been in many, many years. On top of all that, fans are more behind Bryan now than ever. Bryan won people over with his in-ring ability and the fact that he demonstrated that he has legit charisma. We're over a year removed from the beginning of the "Yes!" chants and it's as strong as ever. Hell, fans of other sports like baseball & basketball are doing it. Baseball & basketball players themselves are copying Bryan's mannerisms and doing it as well. Bryan's been showing that he can deliver for the WWE long term and, personally, I ultimately expect him to be somewhere along the lines of Chris Jericho. I think he'll float in the upper mid-card & main event pictures and he'll also be used to help put other guys over because he's able to do that while still look like a million bucks himself.

In the case of Zack Ryder, the guy's the epitome of a flash in the pan. Not very long after Ryder won the US title, fan interest in him was already dying. I think that Ryder's character has demonstrated that he has the ability & personality to connect with fans and to rally them behind him. But, let's face it, comedy characters generally aren't looked upon as big stars. If Honky Tonk Man showed up today in WWE at 30 years of age with the Elvis gimmick, he'd probably be laughed out of the building. He was a mid-card star 25 years ago but, you'll notice, that he was never WWF Champion, nor was he even remotely considered to be given the strap. Neither will guys like Santino & Ryder, and they're 10 times the wrestler HTM was.

In the case of Ryback, again, WWE is testing the waters with him. I do think that they believe in him but, at the same time, where's the payoff if they give him a mega push too quickly only to find out that he just doesn't have the stuff? At this time 7 or 8 months ago, Ryback was a barely tolerated Bill Goldberg clone. His feud with CM Punk put him on the map and got people behind him. I do think they pulled the trigger too quickly on turning Ryback heel. That's just my opinion as I think they could have milked it a whole lot more. The WWE brass might look back on it and ultimately think the same thing. However, it's still pretty early in Ryback's career with his current character. He's only really gotten fans behind him in the last 6 or 8 months and maybe this has allowed WWE to see some of his shortcomings and what needs to be worked on. Maybe he won't get the title right now, but that's not to say that they can't keep building Ryback as a star and give him a title run down the line when they think he's more improved.

 

[newwaveknight]

Something you have to understand about the WWE also: after the end of the Attitude era, they have been more cautious about who they push because they want to make sure that they have a long-term investment with their main-event guys. Keep in mind, before Stone Cold and The Rock left, they didn't really do much at all to put anyone over at their level. This left the WWE in a dry spell, where they didn't have any super-selling stars on par with those two guys. So what did they have to do? Build stars from the ground up, use what main-event guys they had left, and hope that someone in that group could be a huge draw. Now, who could they go to for that? The guy who, despite the politics backstage that he has pulled, has proven himself to be one who will stay with the company whether it's in the ring or behind the scenes: Triple H. So they asked him who he thought would help carry the company and not leave it in a rut. It did pay off, because the WWE had guys like Cena and Orton to help carry the company for a while. And a lot of people want Cena to take a back-burner, but keep in mind that Cena (who was part of the famous Class of '02) has stayed with the company and has done everything he can to help it. Hell, he's been one of the few huge draws to help put over new guys.

Now it's time to put over a new generation of stars (like you have to do every 7-10 years or so), but they want to make sure that their investment with these new guys will pay off. In Bryan/t's case, I believe he has proven that he won't leave the company high and dry like Austin and Rock did. I think Ziggler has proven himself to be a true franchise player, and I think that having him use his Push in a Briefcase to get the WHC has helped solidify him as a main-event guy.

And as far as getting over, let's take a look at the WWE three years ago. The only guy in the title picture then who is in the title picture now is Cena, but despite how some of the IWC feels, he isn't going anywhere. Now I watched RAW yesterday (hooray for DVR!), and it seems to me that the whole main event card has shifted. If it were the same guys from three years ago, I could understand, but it's not.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

This is something that's been plaguing my mind for a few years in regards to the WWE. I and many people on these boards have expressed confusion as to the company's decisions to not immediately push guys into being individual champions immediately after the crowd latches onto them. Over the past 2 years a few men come to mind in this scenario:

- Daniel Bryan was embraced later in 2011 and did eventually become a champion. However, the moment after his stardom took off at WM28, he was soon diverted onto lesser things than the WHC and for a year now, he's been delegated to the Tag Team Division which he isn't even being used as a spark to help other struggling tag teams get over.

Bryan was diverted in to matches with the WWE Champion, the biggest storyline in WWE at the time with AJ's love square, and put on high caliber competitve matches with top talent (Cena, Sheamus, Punk, Kane). He recently did some stuff with the UT, is being used to help get The Shield over, held the tag titles for a long time and most importantly is getting consistent television time on Raw in a wrestling and talking capacity.

A singles title like the WHC, US or IC titles would be a step down from what he has been given for the past year.

- Zack Ryder spent much of 2011 using his free time to help get his unused character face time via youtube. He gained a cult following that translated well into this era of WWE family-friendly programming and was well received by everyone! By the time it finally seemed as if he was getting pushed onto TV regularly, they (kinda literally) buried him.

He's a flash in the pan that doesn't have it. His YouTube work doesn't trnaslate to Raw or SD. There are probably storage units filled with douchey orange sunglasses and spikey wigs.

- Ryback started off sort of lukewarm with the crowd but after weeks of him incessantly shouting out , "WAKE UP!!", "FINISH HIM!!"(later changed to "FINISH IT!!" probably to avoid legal drama with Midway Games) and "FEED! ME! MORE!", one of the sayings finally caught on and arenas were finally in unison with their interest. Then for whatever reason, when Ryback finally crossed paths with the WWE's biggest heel at the time in CM Punk, they had an opportunity. CM Punk's reign VS Ryback's winning streak. But because of the obvious corner they painted themselves into, they decided that Ryback's streak was of less worth than Punk's title reign. (Bad decision imo) And after that, they felt the need to continue this trend of Ryback losing at PPVs in hopes to make all of this look like a part of a growing storyline where Ryback can win all matches except for the big ones. In turn, they've killed his momentum and any real reason to stay invested in him after so much crowd support.

Kind of agree on this one but only because I feel like he could have been handled better not that a title would have necessarily helped him. But injuries and a lack of new talent has forced WWE's hand and Ryback has made a decent run of the shit he's been given.

.
Is there a legitimate reason why these heavily fan-supported men don't get championship pushes during the height of their popularity? It worked for Sheamus in 2009. He became a heel that everyone (including smarks) booed in live audiences. I'd like to read anyone else's thoughts as to why the WWE recently doesn't immediately push proven men who are popular into singles championship pictures.

I think you're giving too much credit to some audiences on how over these guy truly are. I think you're also giving too much credit to what a title run does for a guy.

 

[Mustang Sally]

He's a flash in the pan that doesn't have it.

That might be the short answer to the question posed by the OP. In the cases of Daniel Bryan and Zack Ryder; they were nobodies (in WWE) before grabbing hold of a specific gimmick that brought them notoriety. As good as Daniel was on the technical wrestling side, he was being fed to guys like Sin Cara before gaining a foothold with his "Yes" gimmick. Ryder launched an Internet show that brought him into the spotlight, and Vince McMahon bought into it, being a promoter who knows a good thing.

Aside from that, WWE might have figured those two guys had nothing else going for them....that they had enjoyed a brief fling with fame but really had nothing else to offer for the future. In the case of Ryder, I think they were right. In Daniel's case, they might have been wrong, although I wonder if he'd be enjoying the success he's had without his interactions with Kane. We'll likely be finding out in the near future.

As for Ryback, it's hard to say what WWE thought of his prospects when he started; they might have considered him a one trick pony with a limited shelf life. Yes, it's easy to look at what's happened since and say that's a ridiculous supposition, but I'm talking about what management figured at the start of the guy's tenure, which is when they have to decide whether to push or not.

The point is that WWE pushes their talent....or doesn't.....based on what they think his future prospects hold. Whether we regard those reasons as legitimate or not, management has to take some good guesses......and they're not always going to hit the mark.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

This is something that's been plaguing my mind for a few years in regards to the WWE. I and many people on these boards have expressed confusion as to the company's decisions to not immediately push guys into being individual champions immediately after the crowd latches onto them. Over the past 2 years a few men come to mind in this scenario:

- Daniel Bryan was embraced later in 2011 and did eventually become a champion. However, the moment after his stardom took off at WM28, he was soon diverted onto lesser things than the WHC and for a year now, he's been delegated to the Tag Team Division which he isn't even being used as a spark to help other struggling tag teams get over.

Daniel Bryan's been a WHC and been a major role player in the WWE with Team Hell No. The only reason he's not being pushed into a main event card is because he's not needed as of yet. There will be a time where a heel Bryan will be needed to feud with Cena and then he'll be used. Right now, his role's fine.

- Zack Ryder spent much of 2011 using his free time to help get his unused character face time via youtube. He gained a cult following that translated well into this era of WWE family-friendly programming and was well received by everyone! By the time it finally seemed as if he was getting pushed onto TV regularly, they (kinda literally) buried him.

Zack Ryder made a very fatal mistake: He drew attention to himself to get over. The problem in doing that is you expose your flaws. Those flaws are why Zack Ryder's not being pushed to be a serious star. Those flaws are mediocre wrestling skills, a gimmick that's ran its course, and showing up the WWE. You can do that if you're someone like Stone Cold Steve Austin. You don't do that when you have a catchphrase like "Woo, Woo, Woo" and decide that your huge gimmick change is no longer spiking your hair. And as mentioned ad nauseum, he's a flash in the pan and his pop from the crowd died once they realized he sucked.

- Ryback started off sort of lukewarm with the crowd but after weeks of him incessantly shouting out , "WAKE UP!!", "FINISH HIM!!"(later changed to "FINISH IT!!" probably to avoid legal drama with Midway Games) and "FEED! ME! MORE!", one of the sayings finally caught on and arenas were finally in unison with their interest. Then for whatever reason, when Ryback finally crossed paths with the WWE's biggest heel at the time in CM Punk, they had an opportunity. CM Punk's reign VS Ryback's winning streak. But because of the obvious corner they painted themselves into, they decided that Ryback's streak was of less worth than Punk's title reign. (Bad decision imo) And after that, they felt the need to continue this trend of Ryback losing at PPVs in hopes to make all of this look like a part of a growing storyline where Ryback can win all matches except for the big ones. In turn, they've killed his momentum and any real reason to stay invested in him after so much crowd support.

A streak doesn't matter and the WWE realized that with Ryback. Ryback's going to be a monster no matter how he loses. Just like Mark Henry and Big Show. Even though they've been beaten so many times, they're still big and capable of 'putting it together' to win a big match. What's killed his momentum is his inability to talk and sell himself as a bad guy. If you're a bad guy, do something bad. Rip a poster from a Cena kid and tear it up or Pearl Harbor Cena and beat him to a pulp and feed him to the Shield. Maybe even beat on less fortunate wrestlers. Sheamus was over because he nearly killed Jamie Noble and hurt numerous wrestlers. Ryback has to hurt people to be considered a formidable foe to Cena or anyone.

Is there a legitimate reason why these heavily fan-supported men don't get championship pushes during the height of their popularity? It worked for Sheamus in 2009. He became a heel that everyone (including smarks) booed in live audiences. I'd like to read anyone else's thoughts as to why the WWE recently doesn't immediately push proven men who are popular into singles championship pictures.

Because those folks don't need a belt to validate them. Ryder had the US title and it didn't mean anything to anyone. Same goes for Daniel Bryan. Him being a WHC doesn't make him a better, more over superstar. Ryback's still built like a brick house with or without a title belt. You can still be pushed and not be in the title picture.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Bryan is still getting a push, he just isn't getting pushed to the moon. He is on Raw & Smackdown most weeks, he is usually on Saturday Morning Slam, and he is a champion. Bryan has the flexibility to move around the card and still be effective.

Ryder is a curious case. He still gets decent pops, but he isn't as over as he once was. I think he was simply the result of people loving to get behind an underdog. He can still serve a purpose and I think he is being underutilized, but he is still a long way off.

Ryback I think was the result of WWE writing themselves into a corner by using too many part timers in the main event scene. I think there was a decent chance that Cena could have beaten Punk for the title during his run, but once he was injured, so close to the Rock's return at Royal Rumble they needed to throw someone in to feud with Punk. Ryback was over and he wasn't in a major program so he fit the bill. They couldn't have Punk lose to someone who was essentially a rookie, it would make him look weak in comparison to Rocky, but they had to make Ryback look like a threat so he constantly lost due to outside interference. Punk is without a doubt the #2 guy on the roster and is a bigger draw, so they had to keep him the champion. It resulted in Ryback losing a lot and killing a lot of his momentum. He was and still is over and being pushed, but I think he was pushed into losses too often as the result of short sightedness and fans stopped caring.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Is there a legitimate reason why these heavily fan-supported men don't get championship pushes during the height of their popularity? It worked for Sheamus in 2009. He became a heel that everyone (including smarks) booed in live audiences. I'd like to read anyone else's thoughts as to why the WWE recently doesn't immediately push proven men who are popular into singles championship pictures.

Sheamus is a bad example. He was just pushed heavyly from the start and even now he is not geting over as much as WWE wants. Better example is Punk because he was "internet darling" and even he needed time to be what he is now...

Trouble is 2 things:

1. Not everybody who fans get behind has the skills to be big and over. Worked for Punk and Bryan but you see on Ryders example that its not that easy. He is good for midcard but thats it and I think WWE and even him knows that.

2. Getting over is not that easy. You could have right in-ring skills but no charisma to pull it(like Swagger for example) or you could be good talker but bland in-ring(like Otunga). You could have it all but still not getting over because of some things(stupid gimick or something else). Bryan did it but it was "a fluck" of sort after that Wrestlemania match. Everybody thought that he was going nowhere after that 18 sec match but he pulled off briliantly after that and now he has steady time on Raw. For cryin outloud, he and his storyline was one of the focuses on Raw 1000.

 

[SacredMesa]

What held down Daniel Bryan is the same thing that held down Ryback, well more who, quite simply it was The Rock.

Think about, why didn't Punk drop the title to either of them? Because WWE was already sold on Punk vs Rock for the title, with Punk losing it to Rock for Cena to get it at Mania 29. This was set in stone from the moment The Rock beat Cena at Mania 28. This has been the single biggest taint of everything that has happened with WWE in the past year. They couldn't put the belt on Bryan, as Punk vs Rock was a better sell, and Ryback was to green and young to go against The Rock. Punk had to hold the title and while The Rock plan was going no one else could take it but The Rock.

Because of this obligation imo The Rock has tainted everything that happened this past year. I loved Punk's title reign but did they give it to him because he deserved it? No they gave it to him because he had to hold it until The Rock could take it at The Royal Rumble. No matter how much I love Punk and his reign that is the truth of it and why it happened. This meant Bryan couldn't go over when he was at his biggest, it mean Ryback couldn't get a surprise push, although frankly I was against him ever getting a WWE title shot as quickly as he did. No one could go over Punk until The Rock did, they where booked into that corner and there was really nothing they could do about it.


As for Zack, he was a self made man and even though he transitioned so well and was massively over in the mid card Vince can't tolerate someone making themselves without him.

 

[Headman]

Ryder was any easy one. He got over with comedy segments on youtube and funny tweets. He's not particularly above average in the ring. Actually I think he's pretty unathletic myself. People had these pie in the sky visions for him and blame how he was pushed and his affiliation with Cena, but getting to play Beefcake to Cena's Hogan was the best thing that could ever happen to a guy who has all the makings of a comedic jobber.

Ryback's issue was timing. I believe they should have held back and never given him a WWE title match. Or just stuck to the first title match against Punk and then go back to having him slay dragons on tv and ppv. The Shield damaged Ryback more than anything.

And DB, what more do you want? He had a pretty good world title reign. He's part of a tag team that's constantly featured on the top of the card. It looks to me like he is being pushed.

 

[IT Factor]

I think the answer is really quite simple here; WWE does not know how to create stars and consistently push them anymore. Some of the above listed guys might have become big names if used correctly in connection with fan reaction to them. WWE doesn't listen to their fans anymore, which is why certain guys initially "get over" but then fail. Either because of stop and start pushes or because they weren't ready to main event quite yet. Back in the older days, WWE would have had them in OVW until they were ready and able to contribute. The biggest thing holding talents back these days is "creative". It is obvious these morons writing the shows aren't fans of wrestling and do not know its history. If they were fans, the product would reflect that. I don't believe these people should be booking if they aren't fans first and foremost. Just look at some of the awful gimmicks or how people are/aren't used. The WWE machine has become its own worst enemy at times and that's why new talents cannot rise above it and break the glass ceiling to that next level. Guys like Ryder, Swagger, Bryan, and others are proof of that theory in actuality.

 

[d_henderson1810]

The problem is - Daniel Bryan is good enough to get himself over. He learned from the best (HBK) and performed to audiences all around the world. He knows what gets himself over.

Ryback is a massive dude who will get over in the same way Mark Henry is. Ryback has lost every PPV match he has been in this year - he is not being accepted as a huge threat to Cena for a few reasons. He is unlikely to beat Cena in Cena's first wwe championship feud after winning the belt. And he lost to Mark Henry just before the Cena feud. He will be pushed but it will take a lot to get Ryback over.

Ryder - his start and stop push damaged him. he has to change gimmick and move with the times. maybe a heel turn where he is super aggressive would work. If he is a great worker he will relish the chance to change it up.

Lets look finally at Ziggler, His start stop start stop push damaged him but he eventually remained so over with the crowed because he was so good. He knew how to work the audience. That he cashed in on Raw when the Crowd was at fever pitch only helped (am sure WWE did not expect it or plan it that way - they got lucky).

Not everyone can be The Rock or Stone Cold but if people believe in a character- then it makes their jobs of entertaining easier.

"Daniel Bryan is good enough to get himself over".

You see, statements like this is why I am ashamed to be a wrestling fan. Because stupid internet wrestling fans make statements like this.

You see, when a favourite of the fans gets pushed, they "got themselves over" (e.g. Daniel Bryan, C.M. Punk, Zack Ryder, Dolph Ziggler etc). Yet if these guys aren't put over, it's never because they aren't good enough to get over, it is because "WWE won't push them".

So, if one of your faves makes it, it's 100% due to their own unspeakable drawing power, but, if they don't, it's WWE's fault. So, in essence, WWE have never built a star, the stars build themselves. The fans never get it wrong, do they?

I have heard people say that "Stone Cold" Steve Austin made himself a star. But if it wasn't for Vince McMahon playing the "Mr McMahon" character, good writing, a good storyline etc, SCSA would not have got over as huge as he was. The fans latched onto him early, but only when WWE gave him a good storyline to work with, did he get over.

What I am saying is, if your fave is 100% the reason they get over with fans and get pushed, then it is 100% their fault if they don't as well. You can't have it both ways.

Give credit to WWE for creating the stars you love. C.M. Punk was right when he said "You pay to see me. I don't pay to see you". The fans overrate their importance to the product. If you stopped following WWE tomorrow, they would just get a whole new bunch of people to watch.

SCSA worked BOTH because of himself and WWE. Without the contribution from either party, the storyline wouldn't have worked. So, a star is born both because the wrestler carries himself like a star, and because WWE see him as a star. But BOTH are needed.

A superstar who "gets himself over" will never headline Wrestlemania, unless WWE thinks they can make money out of him main-eventing WM. End of story!

 

[chris21]

Something you have to understand about the WWE also: after the end of the Attitude era, they have been more cautious about who they push because they want to make sure that they have a long-term investment with their main-event guys. Keep in mind, before Stone Cold and The Rock left, they didn't really do much at all to put anyone over at their level. This left the WWE in a dry spell, where they didn't have any super-selling stars on par with those two guys. So what did they have to do? Build stars from the ground up, use what main-event guys they had left, and hope that someone in that group could be a huge draw. Now, who could they go to for that? The guy who, despite the politics backstage that he has pulled, has proven himself to be one who will stay with the company whether it's in the ring or behind the scenes: Triple H. So they asked him who he thought would help carry the company and not leave it in a rut. It did pay off, because the WWE had guys like Cena and Orton to help carry the company for a while. And a lot of people want Cena to take a back-burner, but keep in mind that Cena (who was part of the famous Class of '02) has stayed with the company and has done everything he can to help it. Hell, he's been one of the few huge draws to help put over new guys.

Now it's time to put over a new generation of stars (like you have to do every 7-10 years or so), but they want to make sure that their investment with these new guys will pay off. In Bryan/t's case, I believe he has proven that he won't leave the company high and dry like Austin and Rock did. I think Ziggler has proven himself to be a true franchise player, and I think that having him use his Push in a Briefcase to get the WHC has helped solidify him as a main-event guy.

And as far as getting over, let's take a look at the WWE three years ago. The only guy in the title picture then who is in the title picture now is Cena, but despite how some of the IWC feels, he isn't going anywhere. Now I watched RAW yesterday (hooray for DVR!), and it seems to me that the whole main event card has shifted. If it were the same guys from three years ago, I could understand, but it's not.

Austin yeah but Rock put over plenty of superstars in his time. Infact its one reason I always preferred him to Austin. Austin always wanted to be the guy but Rock was happy to put over other stars. Towards the end of his full time career he put over Lesnar, Hurricane, Goldberg (didn't really need putting over but still) and that's just his final run.

As for the discussion itself I'm a big believer in taking your chances. Fact is the full time guys don't take them. Only a select few do because they want it more.

 

[vampxx24]

What held down Daniel Bryan is the same thing that held down Ryback, well more who, quite simply it was The Rock.

Think about, why didn't Punk drop the title to either of them? Because WWE was already sold on Punk vs Rock for the title, with Punk losing it to Rock for Cena to get it at Mania 29. This was set in stone from the moment The Rock beat Cena at Mania 28. This has been the single biggest taint of everything that has happened with WWE in the past year. They couldn't put the belt on Bryan, as Punk vs Rock was a better sell, and Ryback was to green and young to go against The Rock. Punk had to hold the title and while The Rock plan was going no one else could take it but The Rock.

Because of this obligation imo The Rock has tainted everything that happened this past year. I loved Punk's title reign but did they give it to him because he deserved it? No they gave it to him because he had to hold it until The Rock could take it at The Royal Rumble. No matter how much I love Punk and his reign that is the truth of it and why it happened. This meant Bryan couldn't go over when he was at his biggest, it mean Ryback couldn't get a surprise push, although frankly I was against him ever getting a WWE title shot as quickly as he did. No one could go over Punk until The Rock did, they where booked into that corner and there was really nothing they could do about it.


As for Zack, he was a self made man and even though he transitioned so well and was massively over in the mid card Vince can't tolerate someone making themselves without him.

nice try to blame the rock but there are 2 flaws with what you said. you are correct that the rock/punk/cena scenario was planned in advance. however, this was NOT the reason why punk got the title, punk held the belt 433? days, he got the belt WAY before they planned rock/punk/cena, this was thought of AFTER WM 28, Which punk was already champ. the original idea was to get punk vs scsa.

also, the rock didnt hold back ryback at all, ryback wasnt even planned in the original title picture. ryback was supposed to be brought up slow and spend some time in the midcard. it was when cena hurt his arm, vince pushed the panic button and put ryback in the world title picture to fill cena void. the original idea was to just have rock/punk/cena with cena and punk fueding up till royal rumble where punk would drop to the rock.

 

[shalliin]

I haven't read any of the posts so sorry if anyone feels I'm just ripping them off or insulting them.
There seems to be some confusion about what it means to be pushed and to be over.
1st there is a difference between being pushed and being over. Usually someone gets PUSHED in order to GET over. There's also a bit of confusion about what being OVER means.
Being over should be recognized as having fans cheering or booing you depending on your role as heel/face. It means getting the fans involved and CARING about you and your character. It also has more impact for a LIVE audience to put you over as opposed to us smarks(and I do include myself here) on the IWC who rave about people the casual fan doesn't know anything about. Bryan is a good example of this since his first time through he wasn't resonating with the fans until he hit on the yes/yes/yes and pairing with AJ then no/no/no chants and now being paired with Kane.
2nd just because someone doesn't win a particular match doesn't mean they didn't get a PUSH. hell, 3 weeks before the actual match I would never have picked Ryback as even a potential opponent for Punk and Cena. He was pushed hard to be given the chance to compete with those two and he wasn't ready yet for the last part of the push to give him the belt. I feel he still isn't there yet. But with Punk taking time off to heal up and if Cena is really hurt, there's little choice without bringing in someone who isn't over or is in a different role for the moment.

Being OVER with the IWC like Ryder became doesn't translate to instant credibility with a live audience. Really go back and pay attention and even the little push he got was quickly run down because the live audience lost their interest in him.

Now I'm going to read some of the other replies and possibly comment on them directly.

 

[shalliin]

I suppose one reason, and it's a legit reason in my opinion, is that WWE is interested in pushing wrestlers who are ultimately able to deliver for them in the long run. In order to find that out, it simply takes time. Vince was taught a major lesson with Brock Lesnar when he gave him the push of all pushes. Within 3 months to the day Lesnar debuted on WWE television, he was WWE Champion. He was given huge wins over everyone from Cena to Rock to Big Show to even The Undertaker, not to mention a huge paycheck. But, 17 months later, he was out the door. Did that have more to do with Lesnar's simple lack of passion than his ability? Probably so, but commitment is no less important than ability. It takes time to see whether someone has enough of both, at least in their opinions, to really be elevated.

For example, it's been about 1.5 years since Daniel Bryan won the World Heavyweight Championship. He spent the first half of 2012 either as World Heavyweight Champion or #1 contender for the WWE Championship. As part of Team Hell No, Bryan has helped make tag team wrestling and the tag titles more interesting than they've been in many, many years. On top of all that, fans are more behind Bryan now than ever. Bryan won people over with his in-ring ability and the fact that he demonstrated that he has legit charisma. We're over a year removed from the beginning of the "Yes!" chants and it's as strong as ever. Hell, fans of other sports like baseball & basketball are doing it. Baseball & basketball players themselves are copying Bryan's mannerisms and doing it as well. Bryan's been showing that he can deliver for the WWE long term and, personally, I ultimately expect him to be somewhere along the lines of Chris Jericho. I think he'll float in the upper mid-card & main event pictures and he'll also be used to help put other guys over because he's able to do that while still look like a million bucks himself.

In the case of Zack Ryder, the guy's the epitome of a flash in the pan. Not very long after Ryder won the US title, fan interest in him was already dying. I think that Ryder's character has demonstrated that he has the ability & personality to connect with fans and to rally them behind him. But, let's face it, comedy characters generally aren't looked upon as big stars. If Honky Tonk Man showed up today in WWE at 30 years of age with the Elvis gimmick, he'd probably be laughed out of the building. He was a mid-card star 25 years ago but, you'll notice, that he was never WWF Champion, nor was he even remotely considered to be given the strap. Neither will guys like Santino & Ryder, and they're 10 times the wrestler HTM was.

In the case of Ryback, again, WWE is testing the waters with him. I do think that they believe in him but, at the same time, where's the payoff if they give him a mega push too quickly only to find out that he just doesn't have the stuff? At this time 7 or 8 months ago, Ryback was a barely tolerated Bill Goldberg clone. His feud with CM Punk put him on the map and got people behind him. I do think they pulled the trigger too quickly on turning Ryback heel. That's just my opinion as I think they could have milked it a whole lot more. The WWE brass might look back on it and ultimately think the same thing. However, it's still pretty early in Ryback's career with his current character. He's only really gotten fans behind him in the last 6 or 8 months and maybe this has allowed WWE to see some of his shortcomings and what needs to be worked on. Maybe he won't get the title right now, but that's not to say that they can't keep building Ryback as a star and give him a title run down the line when they think he's more improved.

Hell; even Matt Morgan in TNA is copying Daniel's facial hair, though lately he's been dressing like the Macho Man and copying his mannerisms if not his moveset. Eric Young, DB and MM should form a 3man team and call them selfves 'bearded bastards'. or 'razors be gone'. or Even Better '3 billy goats gruff'

I agree with a lot of what you said, I'd even go as far as saying most of it. This was a well thought out and written reply to this topic. Well done.

 

[shalliin]

Something you have to understand about the WWE also: after the end of the Attitude era, they have been more cautious about who they push because they want to make sure that they have a long-term investment with their main-event guys. Keep in mind, before Stone Cold and The Rock left, they didn't really do much at all to put anyone over at their level. This left the WWE in a dry spell, where they didn't have any super-selling stars on par with those two guys. So what did they have to do? Build stars from the ground up, use what main-event guys they had left, and hope that someone in that group could be a huge draw. Now, who could they go to for that? The guy who, despite the politics backstage that he has pulled, has proven himself to be one who will stay with the company whether it's in the ring or behind the scenes: Triple H. So they asked him who he thought would help carry the company and not leave it in a rut. It did pay off, because the WWE had guys like Cena and Orton to help carry the company for a while. And a lot of people want Cena to take a back-burner, but keep in mind that Cena (who was part of the famous Class of '02) has stayed with the company and has done everything he can to help it. Hell, he's been one of the few huge draws to help put over new guys.

Now it's time to put over a new generation of stars (like you have to do every 7-10 years or so), but they want to make sure that their investment with these new guys will pay off. In Bryan/t's case, I believe he has proven that he won't leave the company high and dry like Austin and Rock did. I think Ziggler has proven himself to be a true franchise player, and I think that having him use his Push in a Briefcase to get the WHC has helped solidify him as a main-event guy.

And as far as getting over, let's take a look at the WWE three years ago. The only guy in the title picture then who is in the title picture now is Cena, but despite how some of the IWC feels, he isn't going anywhere. Now I watched RAW yesterday (hooray for DVR!), and it seems to me that the whole main event card has shifted. If it were the same guys from three years ago, I could understand, but it's not.

I would argue that they need to build a new getn every 4-5 years instead of 7-10. You need to start building that new gen while the old is still around, not after they left. Look at what lead into the attitude era with Hulkamania and the Rock n Wrestling of the 80's leading into a bit of a dry spell during the period of 90-93 with the big 80's names out and having to slowly build up around Taker/bret/shawn and then the card trickling down from them. Things got a little forse for a while and they started doing comicy things until around 95/96 then started going for a grittier product leading into the Attitude era and the Monday night wars. Bret and Shawn were there at the end of the 80's but had been tag team specialists not main event guys and even when shawn turned to hbk for a long time he was still midcard. I would say that that period from 91-95 was headlined by a lot of people who realyl should have been midcarders and when the attitude turned, those people started phasing out. The ones who survived became the core that the new iarrivals were paired with. Guys like Rock, Stone Cold, Foley pairing with established stars like Bret, Shawn and Taker.

As for those leaving, well Stone Cold didn't leave them high and dry so much as personal life and health issues forced him to leave. Rock left to pursue something else and was clear on it during his time in the spotlight and did do the right thing and didn't take off so much as fade out. Unlike Brock who just dropped everything once he had made his money and screwed over everyone. to try football (didn't play in even an exhibition game or even make it to the final part of training camps) then UFC. He had some success in UFC, but he had more fame from WWE then UFC. No one outside of UFC fans know who any of them are, but with WWE there's plenty of opportunity to cross into other interests (Austin, Rock, and many others doing movies and other tv shows. even announcers and interview guys have left to so called legit media jobs.)

 

[shalliin]

What held down Daniel Bryan is the same thing that held down Ryback, well more who, quite simply it was The Rock.

Think about, why didn't Punk drop the title to either of them? Because WWE was already sold on Punk vs Rock for the title, with Punk losing it to Rock for Cena to get it at Mania 29. This was set in stone from the moment The Rock beat Cena at Mania 28. This has been the single biggest taint of everything that has happened with WWE in the past year. They couldn't put the belt on Bryan, as Punk vs Rock was a better sell, and Ryback was to green and young to go against The Rock. Punk had to hold the title and while The Rock plan was going no one else could take it but The Rock.

Because of this obligation imo The Rock has tainted everything that happened this past year. I loved Punk's title reign but did they give it to him because he deserved it? No they gave it to him because he had to hold it until The Rock could take it at The Royal Rumble. No matter how much I love Punk and his reign that is the truth of it and why it happened. This meant Bryan couldn't go over when he was at his biggest, it mean Ryback couldn't get a surprise push, although frankly I was against him ever getting a WWE title shot as quickly as he did. No one could go over Punk until The Rock did, they where booked into that corner and there was really nothing they could do about it.


As for Zack, he was a self made man and even though he transitioned so well and was massively over in the mid card Vince can't tolerate someone making themselves without him.

Ah, once again someone who doesn't understand what a push is. Bryan was pushed hard this year, its just that most of it was in relation to his tag team with Kane in an attempt to bring some interest to the tag division. There is nothing wrong with that and his feud then partnership with Kane is one of the major things that has gotten Bryan over. He was able to show that he could play the role as well as he could wrestle and that he could in the right situations be as interesting outside the ring as he was in it.

I sincerely doubt they planned more then a year ago that Punk was going to lose to Rock for the belt at Rumble. I highly doubt it was that planned out, and while there might have been elements of having a Punk/Rock feud to reintroduce Rock. there could easily have been time Punk lost the belt for say a day, a week or a month or two and then got it back before facing Rock.

As for Ryback, the entire last 3-4 months are a surprise psush. He went from facing jobbers to having trible threat cage matches with the two biggest stars in the company and feuding with a former champ Mark Henry. how is that not getting a push?

While there likely is some element of Vince's ego at work against Zack, he did more damage to himself as during the eve/cena/ryder storyline his poor 'acting' skills started to show through and his in ring work was always a little behind the curve of a main event anyways. He is a mid carder who tried to con the IWC into making him a main event and got slapped down by the live audience who got fed up with his tiresome antics.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Zack Ryder, a flash in the pan? Maybe, but it's difficult to tell if something's just a flash in the pan if you go, "Ah, the pan flashed! Dorothy, quick, get my baseball bat - we've got to destroy the oven!" The idea that it's Zack's fault that he's no longer popular, when he was very popular before he inexplicably lost the US title to Jack Swagger and then reppeared once every six months to lie down for some random heel, is pretty funny. The idea that he couldn't be utilised better than he currently is is funnier still. The implication that he was actually tested out is enough to make you fall on the floor and struggle for breath for five minutes.

 

[H33LTurn]

Daniel Bryan was booked into a disaster match at WM to get Sheamus over, which backfired anyway because no one wanted to see Sheamus as WHC. Ever since then hes sunk back down to the midcard, which is where he belongs. Dont get me wrong, hes talented in the ring, but he hasnt been around long enough to hold a major title. WWE made the same mistake with him they made with Del Rio, they allowed someone's outside popularity affect their careers within the WWE. Dropping a word title on someone who hasnt been around for long and hasnt done anything significant to earn it is going to hurt the product down the line.

Vince's grudge against anyone who gets themselves over without WWE's help is what cut Ryder's push short. If Vince pushes him, every Joe Shmoe is going to start a web show and expect the same results. Vince wants to push a guy because he feels the person has earned it, not because the internet demands him.

Ryback has been doing pretty good so far. The only thing that hurt him was that loss to CM Punk early on. I agree with the other poster that said that Ryback comes off as the guy who can win every match except the big one. His credibility on those grounds has been hurt, but he's doing remarkably better than those last two you mentioned.