And I'm saying that if you execute well, then you'll entertain the crowd. If you entertain the crowd, then you'll draw money. If you're entertaining to the point people pay money to watch you, you're a good/great wrestler.I forgot to mention selling and taking moves. I meant to say that both executing offensive moves and receiving moves and doing it smoothly without looking robotic or clumsy along with drawing money is what makes you a good or great wrestler.
Wrestlers don't draw if they're not entertaining. If they're not entertaining, they cannot be good. Thus, wrestlers who are not good, don't draw.
Very simple logical progression.
No, you're thinking of the King of Kings DVD, the clip of which I posted earlier in which after he said Cena sucks, he goes on to say Cena has since earned everything he's gotten.I do know that I saw a HHH interview where he said Cena "sucked" in the ring. It was a shoot interview outside of WWE so it wasn't a basic promo.
Hogan is probably the most overrated guy in wrestling history.
Yes, he's only considered the greatest wrestler ever by every wrestler whose opinion is worth hearing about. He's only the biggest draw in wrestling history. He only revolutionized the business TWICE in his career. He was only the greatest face and the greatest heel in history.
Completely overrated.
Revisionist history at its finest.The only story he told was that he was a closeted steroid abuser who claimed it was all natural hard work and vitamins.
Hulk Hogan admitted to doing steroids way back in the early 90s. What you have to remember, though, is that steroids weren't illegal until around 1991. So when Hogan was shooting steroids back in the 80s, it was completely legal.
And it DOES take a lot of hard work to get that big. Steroids aren't magic, you have to work to see the benefits.
It's obvious you're either a young kid or someone who didn't watch wrestling much before the Attitude Era. If you had been watching back in the 80s, you'd know how silly this statement is.The other part of the story was that he was getting his ass beat only to miraculously "Hulk Up" and do the single worst move sequence in wrestling history, followed by the worst finisher in wrestling history, a basic crappy legdrop.
In fact I started watching occasionally in 94 when I turned 7 and really found wrestling uninteresting. It wasn't until late 97 or so when I saw Austin that I became hooked for good.
I hadn't even read this part of your post, and STILL pegged you dead on.
You just named 5 matches right there. Not only that, but Cena had a several good matches vs. Punk, several vs. Triple H, several with Edge and several with Batista. What you mentioned right there is a better body of work than anyone else in the WWE during the same time period.Also, could you please tell me what story is it that Cena is telling that is so damn interesting? The only Cena matches that I can name that were interesting to me are Cena vs Punk, Cena vs RVD, Cena vs Triple H, Cena vs Edge, and Cena vs Batista.
But other good matches? His I Quit vs. JBL, his LMS vs. Umaga, his match at GAB with Lashley, he's had a couple of good (not great, but good) matches with Orton, and he had some good matches with Jericho and Angle. Oh, and let's not forget his two classic matches with Shawn Michaels at WM and a couple weeks later on Raw. He even had a pretty solid match with The Miz on Raw earlier this year.
In those matches there are a large variety of stories that were told. Some were the classic WWE babyface match, but others, like his matches with Trips, his matches with RVD, Punk, HBK on Raw and Lashley are all different stories.
You're right, Cena is just the luckiest wrestler in history. Because, as we all know, all of those guys had other great matches with guys who weren't very good in the ring, right?In my opinion, even these matches were only interesting because of who he was facing.
Of course they didn't. In fact, for most of those guys, their best matches came WITH Cena. Take HBK's last 5 years in the company. Outside of his matches with Undertaker, did he have ANY other match that could touch his two with Cena? How about Punk? He's had two matches with Cena that completely outclasses anything else he's done in the WWE. RVD's best match ever came with Cena, as did guys like Barrett, Khali, Umaga, Lashley, etc. There's no doubt their best matches came with Cena.
This IS John Cena's persona. This is who he wants to be.It would help a lot if WWE would let guys create their own persona instead of being afraid of letting a guy get over while owning the rights to his persona because they're afraid he will go to TNA.
No, what it really means is that if a guy gets over, and the WWE doesn't have the rights to his character, that wrestler can go to another wrestling company and make money for another wrestling company because of the time the WWE put into him. You might remember the nWo angle? You can thank mid-90s WCW for the current structure of the WWE.Makes no sense unless they want to be able to treat wrestlers like shit because they know they can. If a guy gets over and draws while owning his persona, Vince can't bully him.
Christian, Hardy, Angle, Foley, Dudleys, Anderson, etc. all disagree with you.Plus WWE offers more publicity than TNA ever will, so guys will not leave.
You're confusing angles with the story he tells in the ring. They are completely different.Gotta agree with PunkNation. Cena does not tell an interesting story. Let me elaborate.
Who is Cena? What drives him? He's supposed to be the good guy who does what's right and loves competition. What does he do to show this? Nothing, other than worry about getting the WWE championship.
For example, take Hart vs. Austin. Hart was about standing up for the right, being the people's hero, being someone kids could look up to. However, the story of his match with Austin at WM 13 was a down and out street fight, a brawl between two guys who hated each other. In that match, you can see Hart losing part of himself in his quest to conquer the man he considers to be an affront to the good people in the world. In the match, Hart begins his slide into the dark side.
That match told such a fantastic story. But it was completely separate from the story of Hart's character at the time. Two different things.
You mean like his feud all last summer with Nexus? Or his year long off and on feud with The Rock?They could put some actual flavor on this character by having him get involved in moral/ethic conflicts , beating up people he deems as "in the wrong"
Fine then. I think John Cena is the greatest wrestler ever, and so because I think that, then he clearly is a better wrestler than anyone else in the world. Since I said it, it must be true, right?Also, I don't see why someone would base their opinion of an entertainer on their sales, instead of simply looking at the content provided by said entertainer. If that's the case, why even discuss anything? We should all automatically 100% support and approve of anyone who drives profit for the current quarter. Not to mention circumstantial and behind the scenes factors that we couldn't possibly know of, such as the example I provided earlier of Rey Mysterio selling house shows in certain places because certain ethnic groups support him out of familiarity.
Do you understand why that is a silly way to evaluate quality? I don't like Cena because he sells, I like Cena because he's fantastically entertaining. I liked Shelton Benjamin years ago because I enjoyed his aerial feats. I enjoy AJ Styles because he's exciting in the ring, and he's a fantastic dance partner for other workers.
However, I know Cena is a great wrestler because so many people are entertained by him (whether they like to cheer or boo him) they are willing to pay money to watch him. When THAT many people are entertained by someone, you know he's a good wrestler.