**MERGED** John Cena Thread - Heel Turn, Matches, Etc. (Keep it in here!!)

[Mustang Sally]

You really want to talk about HBK in a conversation in which you are bitching about Cena putting no one over? The whiny brat left like a pussy rather than put others over.

It's a valid point. Yes, it's hard to fault a guy for retiring from a sport like pro wrestling once he's reached his 40's. Yet, the guy looked to be in great shape and I was rather looking forward to the twilight of his career in which he didn't have to be the great American hero who always triumphs in the face of adversity. Many fan favorites (heels and faces) have used those latter years to remain people we want to see in the ring, yet managed to put over young, rising stars; returning the favors that were extended to them earlier in their careers.

HBK seemed like a prime candidate for this role and it was disappointing to have him ride off to Marlboro country rather than give us the pleasure of seeing him do for others what had so often been done for him. But, from things we heard about him over the years, it wasn't that surprising he chose this path.

 

[DaeChi]

It's a valid point. Yes, it's hard to fault a guy for retiring from a sport like pro wrestling once he's reached his 40's. Yet, the guy looked to be in great shape and I was rather looking forward to the twilight of his career in which he didn't have to be the great American hero who always triumphs in the face of adversity. Many fan favorites (heels and faces) have used those latter years to remain people we want to see in the ring, yet managed to put over young, rising stars; returning the favors that were extended to them earlier in their careers.

HBK seemed like a prime candidate for this role and it was disappointing to have him ride off to Marlboro country rather than give us the pleasure of seeing him do for others what had so often been done for him. But, from things we heard about him over the years, it wasn't that surprising he chose this path.

You speak of this as if Shawn Michaels was a bad guy for wanting to spend more time with his family. Shawn has 2 wonderful children at home. Can you honestly fault him for choosing to be with them throughout their life, instead of on the road week after week, month after month, year after year. I would rather Shawn Michaels retire and go home to Marlboro country than to see him washed up lacking the ability to remember half of his life because he's taken bump after bump after bump.

Shawn Michaels did absolutely no disservice towards professional wrestling by retiring instead of staying on screen like so many others have. He put over many people throughout his tenure in the WWE. He brought everyone around him to new heights. How many wrestlers can we say the pinnacle of their career was wrestling against Shawn Michaels? Today the IWC bashes Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, and other legends that simply cannot step away from the ring; however we bash Shawn Michaels for stepping away too early?

 

[bigjoe113]

You really want to talk about HBK in a conversation in which you are bitching about Cena putting no one over? The whiny brat left like a pussy rather than put others over. That his better days after his comeback had a few instances of him putting others over doesn't take away from the fact that HBK was for a very long time a selfish prick the likes of which many of you accuse Cena of being.



False. The fans who wet their panties with the "shoot" were likely already Punk fans. People who know too much about the industry, the insiders, the ones who get the references that most viewers don't. Punk still wasn't OVER until he did what so many of you claim is never done: he went over Cena clean on PPV. Punk needed a Cena win to pop up to the next level, and Cena happily made him look like a million bucks. To believe otherwise is idiocy.



I never saw Rock lose clean in those days. He lost to HHH and what goonies HHH had around him to protect him. Such hypocrisy; for someone who likes to talk about the old days, you sure have selective memory about it. See my previous post about your accusation that Cena is to blame for WWE problems like ratings (hint: your argument is full of shit). Also, Rock was always a place holder for Austin. WWE did better ratings because WCW was putting out utter shit for tv.



You are such a nerd. You want to grow up and BE THE ROCK? You want to BE AROUND HIM? LOL!

Also, your theory is shit. It's your perception, but it's not fact. There are plenty of Cena fans who are also adult males. An admin of these boards, for example. Your opinion of Rock is valid, but is nothing more than that; opinion. Personally, I thought Rocky was mediocre shit back in the day, and that hasn't improved in modern times. But I got why he was over. In many ways, I view The Rock in the same way I view Cena.



Silly "no-sell" arguments. Take that shit back to Hulkamania and suck an egg while you're there.



Your perception of history here is flawed at best. It's quite clear at this point that you really have no idea what you're talking about. It was years AFTER Hulk hit WCW that WCW was able to knock WWE off the top spot. And if we're talking about making stars after you, again, didn't Cena just help make Punk?

Everybody knows Shawn was a Prick but ask Vince. When it came to doing whats right for business HBK always did whats right while kicking and screaming. And there was this Austin guy even though Shawn could barely walk and do anything but still went out there to put him over knowing his career was over. A few guys? Shawn put over every main guy the WWE has had the past five years so thank u Shawn.

Punk became a instant main eventer after his "shoot". He was already over yea but became a bigger star aka Austin 3:16 like promo. Watch the Raws leading to MITB. Cena did his job by putting him over...clean egh. Punk became a bigger star by leaving that night in Chicago with the title....no matter who he probably faced.

Yea Rock never lost clean cough cough Austin. Rock was the only guy on his level so they he had no problem putting Austin over. I keep saying I DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT CLEAN ITS ABOUT PUTTING PEOPLE OVER. Cena is part blame bcuz he's the main guy. Rock/Austin would of been blamed if they lost to WCW. Mostly its on Vince just watch the shitty CM Punk storyline when he came back.

Rock was soooooo mediocre. Even though he was your biggest draws in wrestling history during a given time and still is. Why was Austin so popular bcuz every guy wanted to be him and every woman wanted to sleep with him. That's my point, that's what makes a big draw.

Opinions aren't facts but opinions can be idiotic. I'm just saying how i view things so lighten up pansy. (cena voice) & I'm Done (Chris Brown voice). I know how much you wrestling fans love you some Chris Brown lmao. Now that was pathetic Punk.

 

[Davi323]

You speak of this as if Shawn Michaels was a bad guy for wanting to spend more time with his family. Shawn has 2 wonderful children at home. Can you honestly fault him for choosing to be with them throughout their life, instead of on the road week after week, month after month, year after year. I would rather Shawn Michaels retire and go home to Marlboro country than to see him washed up lacking the ability to remember half of his life because he's taken bump after bump after bump.

Shawn Michaels did absolutely no disservice towards professional wrestling by retiring instead of staying on screen like so many others have. He put over many people throughout his tenure in the WWE. He brought everyone around him to new heights. How many wrestlers can we say the pinnacle of their career was wrestling against Shawn Michaels? Today the IWC bashes Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, and other legends that simply cannot step away from the ring; however we bash Shawn Michaels for stepping away too early?

I don't know if you understood Sally's perspective...I took it as an expression of personal disappointment, the way a beloved athlete on a sports team retires and you know that you won't get to see them play anymore, not that Shawn somehow gipped the WWE in any way.

Nor was she even bashing HBK for retiring. It was just a "it would have been nice" kind of sentiment. And, if my perception of what Sally was saying is correct, I agree with her. I would have loved to see HBK continue to provide some rub on the younger wrestlers too, but I don't begrudge him for retiring. Hell, I would have loved to see HBK wrestle into his 50s, he would probably still be better than 90% of the roster...but, when he decides he is done, he is done, and I respect the decision, even if it deprives me of the chance to keep watching him.

I am a long time Detroit Lions fan. That means, I got to witness the greatest running back of all time retire, while in 100% perfect heath, the season before he would have set the all-time rushing record, knowing that if he only played 2-3 more years, he would have set the rushing yards record so far up there, it would stand forever. I was incredibly disappointed that Barry Sanders would not play anymore. But, that doesn't mean he was wrong for retiring. His timing could have been better, but if he wanted to retire, that's all his choice. Like Barry, Shawn Michaels chose to retire on his own terms, and I respect that. I miss him, I want him to unretire out of my own selfish desire to see him wrestle again, but, that's on me, not him.

Sally, feel free to tell me if I am way off base with my interpretation of what you said...

 

[Mustang Sally]

Sally, feel free to tell me if I am way off base with my interpretation of what you said...

No, you're seeing what I was trying to say. Celebrities lead different lives than the rest of us; they have more fame, more power.....and much more money than any of us will ever see. Then, they expect to live like any average Joe when saying they're "just like us." But, the celebs are not like us. Many of them want the attention, while simultaneously wanting not to be bothered too much by people. That's having it both ways.....and celebrated people are often able to do just that. They're happy on top but most are realistic enough to know that no one stays on top forever.

I'm disappointed in Shawn for retiring, and am not necessarily buying the standard "wanting to spend more time with my family" line. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but it seems to me he started tossing that idea when the time had arrived to participate in the "cycle-down" all athletes eventually go through. I'm not talking about him suddenly becoming The Brooklyn Brawler and jobbing to everyone they put him in the ring with; but it would have been nice to see him do for others on the way up as superstars of the past did for Shawn when he was first making it. He was "The Showstopper" for a very long time and enjoyed the adulation that came from winning almost everything he ever engaged in.

Did Shawn ever job for anyone? Yes, of course he did, but isolated examples don't negate the main point.....and I wish he had stayed longer at the fair.

 

[sTyLnK]

There's nothing wrong with Cena. People are just sick of his character and Vince and Co. are just scared to lose the merchandise sales he generates, so that's why he's been the good guy for so long. It's nothing more than that. As Vince and Triple H have said, it's good for business.

 

[Raptor93]

not to be picky but for "wrestling" I would say terrible, he rarely puts on a half decent show which is apparently godly to his fan base, yet if that quality was shown by any other main eventer it would be meh worthy. For "Sports entertainment" I guess he's about as good as it gets these days, he sells anything by the truck load and thats what its all about.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I think he is both good and bad, but more on the side of good.

The Good
He brings attention to the "sport"
He sells tickets
He sells merchandise
He does a lot of charity work
He is arguably the best goodwill ambassador for the WWE
He does a lot of promotional work

The Bad
He is a stale character who they refuse to change because of the listed reasons
He isn't a bad worker but he has gotten by with putting on the same matches for years
He is an example of favoritism being showed by the higher ups

I dislike the guy in ring but I can't deny the impact he has on the business and the good work he does outside the ring

 

[Scuba 06]

Cena himself is not the problem, so much as the way his character has been used or booked for several years. I remember doing a thread on this a number of months ago and it is an issue that really gets under my skin. The fact of the matter is I like John Cena, the performer and the individual. I think he is good guy, who means well, and always gives great effort. He always seems to work hard and is devoted to the company. All that is fine, the issue however is that for the last 6 years or so, WWE has shoved him down the fans throats against their will. Is the entire crowd in every arena totally against him, maybe not. However, when at anyone point in the history of WWE, or any other wrestling program, has the fan base responded so negatively to a character, and management instead of responding to the reaction of the crowd, like they would 98% of time, they just blow them off entirely, and say screw you, this is the way its going to be. So Cena has remained largely the same character since 2005, and has been the dominant story of the show pretty much every year. Instead of progressing Cena's character, his growth has stalled, and in return, via him being the star, lowered the quality of the entire format of the show, since everyone thing else revolves around him. Outside of the current Undertaker, who is immensely popular, and already a legend, what other star has has remained either a face or heel for a period that encompasses more than half their career, like Cena has ? You may Cena is good for the program because he is the driving revenue, but that is the problem, he is the ONLY one driving any legitimate interest. The fact of the matter is, the entire product as a whole could be so much better. At this point, Cena is 34 and there should be other stars who already at his level, to be the carrier of the torch for the future, but outside of Orton, no one else is out there. Maybe Punk is the exception, but Cena being the top star with an outdated character, who just dominates the program has lost interest in the show and is reflected in the ratings and buyrates. Its not all his fault per say, but everything from the top affects whats below it, and how the show is run. Booker's are just lazy and lacking creativity to take risk and try new things. The show is just flat and dull. Cena needs to change. He is halting the company's progress. WWE and their poor booking is ******ing the growth of the show.

 

[GameOver]

Cena himself is not the problem, so much as the way his character has been used or booked for several years. I remember doing a thread on this a number of months ago and it is an issue that really gets under my skin. The fact of the matter is I like John Cena, the performer and the individual. I think he is good guy, who means well, and always gives great effort. He always seems to work hard and is devoted to the company. All that is fine, the issue however is that for the last 6 years or so, WWE has shoved him down the fans throats against their will. Is the entire crowd in every arena totally against him, maybe not. However, when at anyone point in the history of WWE, or any other wrestling program, has the fan base responded so negatively to a character, and management instead of responding to the reaction of the crowd, like they would 98% of time, they just blow them off entirely, and say screw you, this is the way its going to be. So Cena has remained largely the same character since 2005, and has been the dominant story of the show pretty much every year. Instead of progressing Cena's character, his growth has stalled, and in return, via him being the star, lowered the quality of the entire format of the show, since everyone thing else revolves around him. Outside of the current Undertaker, who is immensely popular, and already a legend, what other star has has remained either a face or heel for a period that encompasses more than half their career, like Cena has ? You may Cena is good for the program because he is the driving revenue, but that is the problem, he is the ONLY one driving any legitimate interest. The fact of the matter is, the entire product as a whole could be so much better. At this point, Cena is 34 and there should be other stars who already at his level, to be the carrier of the torch for the future, but outside of Orton, no one else is out there. Maybe Punk is the exception, but Cena being the top star with an outdated character, who just dominates the program has lost interest in the show and is reflected in the ratings and buyrates. Its not all his fault per say, but everything from the top affects whats below it, and how the show is run. Booker's are just lazy and lacking creativity to take risk and try new things. The show is just flat and dull. Cena needs to change. He is halting the company's progress. WWE and their poor booking is ******ing the growth of the show.

Yup pretty much been said in hundreds of threads, it's not Cena that's the issue, it's the lameness of the character that doesn't appeal to the older fans that bothers them (me included) personally John is obviously someone any company would put everything into. Dedicated, Reliable and plays the PR game like a pro

and if there were other people who could step up to the plate and get as much reaction he wouldn't have been the sole face of the company, sadly there isn't. Poor booking, shoddy creative writing, and a seeming loss of the passion for sports entertainment that made WWF/E so great in the past.
One could also argue that stars are dictated too cause they refuse to do the work that stars of yester year had to do out of necessity to survive going from company to company. Roddy Piper said as much in an OTR interview.

They are great athletically and alot are very driven, but they perform to appease the office not to entertain fans, don't want to learn to think on there feet and don't know any better because they didn't have to start from the bingo halls and such and grind for a decade b4 they got any fame. (not all of them obviously)

Those are the bigger issues then Cena

 

[Niicks]

Cena's wrestling ability has never been a problem. The guy's in great shape, he's well trained, and he works great with all of the other talent that WWE has. His mic skills are great as well. But yes, you can't argue with the fact his character has been way, WAY too dragged out of the years. I don't blame that on Cena, however. I think that you could put him in any spot or any character and he would have no troubles perfecting it and make it entertaining.

But as for pure wrestling skill, I think that he as at one of the best points in his career.

 

[Cats Pajamas]

In my honest opinion, I think Cena is great for the wrestling industry. I was indifferent to Cena for quite some time but I've come around as of late. I can't help but admire his professionalism. For years we've been hearing audiences chant "Cena Sucks" out of dislike for his nice guy personna. That must take a lot out of someone; not really the position I'd want to be in.

Even while half of the audience has refused to buy into his storyline like rebellious teenagers, he's still been able to work the crowd and get people going even if it means encouraging their dislike of him. He does this night in and night out (and twice on Sundays) despite going around the U.S. doing off air work. That kind of dedication and work ethic is good for any industry. I mean, the guy must be pretty sore by the time he finally gets to sleep.

I also like his matches. You can argue that he retains a certain grouping of moves in his matches, but doesn't everybody? How many people don't have signatures they like to hit in their matches? It keeps the matches at a faster pace and also allows his style to blend well with most other wrestlers ensuring we don't get something like HHH/Steiner at the Rumble or Goldberg/Lesnar at Mania 20. When the moment calls for Cena to hit a spot in special match type, he delivers in this wrestling fans eyes.

When the time comes, will Cena keep his ego in check and work to get others over? I can't tell for sure, but from what I've seen thus far I would imagine yes and his "Super-Cena" status will only advance that. Not to mention he keeps people coming to the shows whether you want to admit it or not. Sorry to rave on and on, but I do think the boy works hard and is probably not given his due credit.

In summation, yeah, I think Cena's good for wrestling, and what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Thanks for asking. Best regards, wrestling fans.

 

[mrfantastic111]

Cena is fantastic for business. Let me just point out one major factor that people continuously skip...

Fans will rant about Cena for ages and ages saying how they want Cena to go away, however; IWC and 'mature aged' fans react to Cena the same way that casual fans react to top/annoying heels - they will pay good money to see them have their asses kicked.

People will complain about Cena being bad for business, but just as Cena has those who will pay to see him win, he reaches just as many demographics that will pay to see him lose. For example, the WWE is going to make MILLIONS at this years Wrestlemania from fans buying the PPV hoping to see Rocky beat up Cena. Not so long ago, people were tuning into RAW in hopes to see Kane force Cena over to the dark-side. Just as people will pay to see Cena be the hero, people will continue to pay good money hoping that Cena will have his ass wooped, or that he will turn heel, or that he will put over new talent. If anything, Cena is the closest thing to a perfect draw - he reaches all fans of the WWE in some way. Those who love him will buy his shirts; and those who hate him will buy the anti-Cena shirts.

Plus, if anything, Cena has helped guys like Randy, Punk, etc reach the stock and drawing power that they've reached today.

 

[BaconBits]

Cena is good for business. It isn't even debatable. He does so much for the WWE, and in turn, the whole business. He is this generation;s Hogan without the tremendous ego and me-first attitude.

Is his character stale/boring at this point? For sure. Thing is, without another megastar, the WWE is forced to keep him in the Super Cena role. If another talent manages to attain a similar megastar level (i.e. The Rock to Austin), then the WWE will change Cena's character and people will finally stop complaining that he's so stale.

Thing is, I fear that, right now at least, that there really isn't anybody currently on the roster even close to achieving that. So we're going to have SuperCena around for a few years. You might as well enjoy it, ya know.

 

[Mustang Sally]

He's terrific. He's got the "it" factor all performers want to possess, yet few have. He knows how to work a crowd on the mic and in the ring..... he knows how to time his speeches for maximum effect, he knows how to work a match even though he's far from the best technical wrestler around .......and when he's in the ring with other wrestlers, I find myself watching him, regardless of what the others are doing.

He's equally adept at playing the hero or the goat, and it's amusing to read people on this forum talking about "Super Cena" as if the guy never suffers setbacks. In fact, no other top performer suffers more of them. It's how he bounces back from adversity that earns him scorn as "Super Cena," but anyone else trying to do the things he does would look so ridiculous that the audience would turn off immediately. Instead, Cena brings it off and keeps us rooting for him and against him, making him the most versatile performer in WWE.

Eventually, the company will pull the trigger and turn Cena heel. Some people on this forum think that will cause merchandise sales to drop.....which is totally wrong. Cena as a bad guy will be the biggest thing in a long time. It will also cure the "staleness" he's accused of.

Some people don't have it and never will......Cena has it and always has. Call it charisma, if you want.....but whatever it's called, John Cena has the ability to be the top character in his company while adopting a persona that is strictly his own.....no gimmicks, no costumes, no shortcuts......just the man himself. (To illustrate, where would Mark Calloway be without his "Undertaker" gimmick?)

Talk all you want about Cena growing stale, but the notion he might not be good for wrestling is like debating whether Michael Jordan was good for basketball. John Cena is the best.

 

[thisiskevin32]

Let me get back to the question at hand...Is Cena a good wrestler?

Strictly talking wrestling vs entertainment, I would say yes.

The Cena of right now is boring and predictable, he gets worked all match until he busts out the 5 moves of doom. We have all seen it before, and most of us are bored with it.

Look at the John Cena who wrestled in his gold trunks with the gold boots; he is very capable of wrestling and wrestling good.

The problem now is that he is so build up in his character that changing him in any way could potentially be a turn off to all those kids who worship him now. Vince and company is not stupid, they market towards kids so that they will have a loyal fan base in years to come.

 

[I Heart Cena]

Cena is good for business. It isn't even debatable. He does so much for the WWE, and in turn, the whole business. He is this generation;s Hogan without the tremendous ego and me-first attitude.

Is his character stale/boring at this point? For sure. Thing is, without another megastar, the WWE is forced to keep him in the Super Cena role. If another talent manages to attain a similar megastar level (i.e. The Rock to Austin), then the WWE will change Cena's character and people will finally stop complaining that he's so stale.

Thing is, I fear that, right now at least, that there really isn't anybody currently on the roster even close to achieving that. So we're going to have SuperCena around for a few years. You might as well enjoy it, ya know.

He's this generation's Hogan without the charisma and entertainment value.

Just because no one else is qualified to be the Superface, doesn't mean there has to be one. There's nothing wrong with an ensemble cast.

And I strongly disagree with "you might as well enjoy it". There are many other entertainment options out there. We don't have to swallow whatever Vince wants to feed us.

 

[Marv95]

I don't like Cena but he's great for getting the next generation of fans interested in wrestling. Like Hogan in the 80's.

Except Hogan helped revolutionize wrestling in that time period. Cena hasn't.

Megastar face? No one has yet to explain to me why they need another Cena/Hogan. They didn't need one in the early 2000s. Not like they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Plus the product was MUCH better than today's.

But I'll say this. Cena has been alot more tolerable the last 2 weeks. He punked out Rock 2 weeks in a row. That's the Cena that made me mark for him in the middle of the Ruthless Aggression Era.

 

[Paralyzer Z]

He's this generation's Hogan without the charisma and entertainment value

.I'm sure the majority of the audience that care about Cena would disagree with you. Part of what makes fans emotionally invested in a superstar are the qualities of charisma and of course entertainment value.

Just because no one else is qualified to be the Superface, doesn't mean there has to one. There's nothing wrong with an ensemble cast.

Then where else does would Vince get his piles of cash to sleep on? Big super face = big business.

And I strongly disagree with "you might as well enjoy it". There are many other entertainment options out there. We don't have to swallow whatever Vince wants to feed us.

You're right we don't but guess what? The audience does "swallow it" as you say and enjoys, once again that equals to good business. It'y your choice to prefer WWE superstars, though the opinion of a small minority of the audience is not likely to be catered to.

Except Hogan helped revolutionize wrestling in that time period. Cena hasn't.

I don't believe Cena HAS TO revolutionize wrestling. All he has to do is remain the WWE"s cash crop and biggest superstar and he is good.

Megastar face? No one has yet to explain to me why they need another Cena/Hogan. They didn't need one in the early 2000s. Not like they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Plus the product was MUCH better than today's.

I assume you have forgotten Stone Cold and The Rock? In wrestling there always must be a clear cut big babyface so that WWE or any other promotion always has someone that they can rely on. Again it's simple business logic.

But I'll say this. Cena has been alot more tolerable the last 2 weeks. He punked out Rock 2 weeks in a row. That's the Cena that made me mark for him in the middle of the Ruthless Aggression Era.

Tolerable? I say he's always been tolerable, just more entertaining within the past couple of weeks. Of course that'w what you get when it comes to Wrestlemania season.

 

[Scuba 06]

I couldn't disagree with some of you more. Cena, or rather how he is used, is part of the problem. If you are asking, is he good for business, there a couple of ways to look at it. Is Cena generating fan interest, obviously that would be yes. The other question that no one seems to consider is, is he driving fans away ? What you fail to realize is the bigger picture, and how Cena is not helping progress the WWE to new heights, and in other ways has driven interest away from the overall product. You see the WWE is always going to have its loyal fan-base no matter what. A section of that demographic is kids. Kids are always going to watch, always have, always will. Some of you will say, well, that's their consistent audience, so we have to adapt to their wishes. Fair enough. The problem is you have them and then what else ? Not much. So when they get poor ratings or buys from PPV's, why are they surprised to see interest down, if they only catered to one group ? Look at this way, if you are running for president, you are going to have your local base, who will vote for you no matter what. In order to win, however, you are going to need to win over other groups who are not sure whether to invest in what you are selling. Some of you are saying WWE is doing fine and the numbers are okay where they are. This is where the problem lies. Some of you seem to be content with the status quo, and thus WWE, Vince, and management will settle for a mediocre product. Are the raw ratings terrible, obviously not. The question you should consider is, what can we do make them better. That is the bigger picture. Its mediocrity and the status quo vs progressing and striving for excellence. How can you try the same thing over and over, and expect better results. This is the formula they use with Cena. The same guy, same gimmick for more than half a decade. The same act played out a million times over. The only star who ever gets attention, and WWE expects people to pay for the movie they have already seen 15 times. Who wants to make waves and bring more interest, right. As if trying something new is going to alienate the audience who is always there.


WWE is not trying to do better, they are settling for being average, and in turn becoming complacent. The WWE is doing alright, but what is holding them back from getting better ? Lazyness, which is the word to sum of how their product comes across. Dull, played out, uninspiring, basically ******ed growth. That's everything that John Cena encompasses and him being the top star helps to provide the overall direction and format of the program, since it mainly revolves around the way top stars are booked. Everything at the top always affects whats below. Is Cena responsible for poor talent, no, but in catering to the format Cena brings, the system creates an environment where, certain stars are placed in poor roles because writers lack creativity and the progression of character is held back because people in charge are afraid to take risks or bring changes. WWE did not become what it is today by sticking with Doink the Clown, they had to take risks, and they paid off. Rocky Mavia become The Rock and the Ring Master became Steve Austin. Who is to say the talent out there is being held back because of poor gimmicks, and lack of character development. That is why Cena is a problem. WWE is okay with their top draw's mediocrity and thus they settle for it everywhere else. Who knows where WWE might be today if Cena turned heel years ago, how different might the entire landscape be ? It may have been better, well never know. No, instead they blew you off and said you didn't matter. Us the people, who made them what they are. Cena is no hogan, and this is not the 1980s. Fans dont have the attention span to put up with the same show for years upon years. Eventually people got sick of Hogan and a change was necessary. People have been waiting for Cena's change for SIX years. Another difference is Hulkamania was authentic, Cenation had to be shoved down the fans throat until they were forced to like it. WWE never treated fans like that before. WWE insulted you as a fan base, and you would defend them ?

 

[DirtyJosé]

I couldn't disagree with some of you more. Cena, or rather how he is used, is part of the problem. If you are asking, is he good for business, there a couple of ways to look at it. Is Cena generating fan interest, obviously that would be yes. The other question that no one seems to consider is, is he driving fans away ?

Well, he's making them money, selling them shows, and Cena at WM seems to be primed to be one of their most successful events ever. Is driving fans away? Not enough for it to be considered a problem. Hell, most fans I see "claiming" that Cena will make them stop watching keep on watching anyway.

What you fail to realize is the bigger picture, and how Cena is not helping progress the WWE to new heights, and in other ways has driven interest away from the overall product. You see the WWE is always going to have its loyal fan-base no matter what. A section of that demographic is kids. Kids are always going to watch, always have, always will. Some of you will say, well, that's their consistent audience, so we have to adapt to their wishes. Fair enough. The problem is you have them and then what else ? Not much.

The youth is always where WWE has shot to impress. Those kids get their parents to buy them shirts and wristbands and PPV shows. Those kids get their parents to take them to shows. Those kids want toys and such. Those kids bring in more money than the 20-somethings who are more likely to stream a PPV than buy it.

So when they get poor ratings or buys from PPV's, why are they surprised to see interest down, if they only catered to one group ? Look at this way, if you are running for president, you are going to have your local base, who will vote for you no matter what. In order to win, however, you are going to need to win over other groups who are not sure whether to invest in what you are selling. Some of you are saying WWE is doing fine and the numbers are okay where they are. This is where the problem lies. Some of you seem to be content with the status quo, and thus WWE, Vince, and management will settle for a mediocre product. Are the raw ratings terrible, obviously not. The question you should consider is, what can we do make them better. That is the bigger picture.

And the typical suggestion from internet dullards is that Cena should go heel or otherwise entirely change his gimmick to make things better. What people like that fail to realize is that doing so will risk taking Cena from being a cash cow to being a joke. Cena works. People of all ages enjoy him. Why throw that away for the potential of winning over people who are likely to just bitch about everything anyway?

Its mediocrity and the status quo vs progressing and striving for excellence. How can you try the same thing over and over, and expect better results. This is the formula they use with Cena. The same guy, same gimmick for more than half a decade. The same act played out a million times over. The only star who ever gets attention, and WWE expects people to pay for the movie they have already seen 15 times. Who wants to make waves and bring more interest, right. As if trying something new is going to alienate the audience who is always there.

The audience who is always there is you. The guys who whine and bitch and complain, but keep watching anyway. They know they've got you. If you stop watching, it's not a big loss to them. This is true for any "die-hard" fans of media, be it comics, games, or television. The companies know that you'll always be there regardless of what they do, so they don't really care.

Also, they have tried other things. They've tried pushing other guys, having PPV's without Cena main events. You know what happens? Buy rates drop. Ratings drop. Anyone with the brainpower to understand the numbers know that WWE does better with Cena around than without.

WWE is not trying to do better, they are settling for being average, and in turn becoming complacent. The WWE is doing alright, but what is holding them back from getting better ? Lazyness, which is the word to sum of how their product comes across. Dull, played out, uninspiring, basically ******ed growth.

Seems like the same product it was in the 90's, or in fact as wrestling's always been.

That's everything that John Cena encompasses and him being the top star helps to provide the overall direction and format of the program, since it mainly revolves around the way top stars are booked. Everything at the top always affects whats below. Is Cena responsible for poor talent, no, but in catering to the format Cena brings, the system creates an environment where, certain stars are placed in poor roles because writers lack creativity and the progression of character is held back because people in charge are afraid to take risks or bring changes.

So maybe the problem is the creative staff, and not Cena. By that I mean, it doesn't matter if they used Cena a certain way or not; they're still going to have bad ideas. You speak in such a way as if to demonstrate some point about Cena being on top being unhealthy, but you lack a credible link between Cena being a top guy and the staff being a bunch of brainless monkeys. Nice try, though.

WWE did not become what it is today by sticking with Doink the Clown, they had to take risks, and they paid off. Rocky Mavia become The Rock and the Ring Master became Steve Austin. Who is to say the talent out there is being held back because of poor gimmicks, and lack of character development. That is why Cena is a problem. WWE is okay with their top draw's mediocrity and thus they settle for it everywhere else.

Funny, because they've given lots of guys room at the top away from Cena. Miz. Sheamus. Punk. Del Rio. Henry. Christian. Bryan. And almost all of them were shat on by people like you. Ratings dropped. Buy rates dropped. How is that supposed to show Creative that going Cena-less or "shaking things up" is a good idea?

Who knows where WWE might be today if Cena turned heel years ago, how different might the entire landscape be ? It may have been better, well never know. No, instead they blew you off and said you didn't matter. Us the people, who made them what they are. Cena is no hogan, and this is not the 1980s. Fans dont have the attention span to put up with the same show for years upon years. Eventually people got sick of Hogan and a change was necessary. People have been waiting for Cena's change for SIX years.

Hogan didn't turn because he had to. Hogan turned because he wanted to be on the cash cow with Nash and Hall. Hogan was a bigger phony that Cena will ever be.

Another difference is Hulkamania was authentic, Cenation had to be shoved down the fans throat until they were forced to like it. WWE never treated fans like that before. WWE insulted you as a fan base, and you would defend them ?

LULZ. And at the end of your horribly written post, you make what might be the dumbest statement of all of it. "Shoved down our throats"? Just because you don't like Cena doesn't mean others didn't as well. I know it's hard for you to believe, but people don't start throwing money away just because they've been "forced to like" something. They bring out the wallet when they really like something. Cena got over, like it or not. People saw something they enjoyed and wanted to see more of. Please, come back when you know what the fuck you're talking about.

Also, while you're out, please learn to type properly. And put some fucking paragraph breaks in your shit, yo.

 

[Marv95]

Then where else does would Vince get his piles of cash to sleep on? Big super face = big business.

Improved buyrates for starters.

I assume you have forgotten Stone Cold and The Rock? In wrestling there always must be a clear cut big babyface so that WWE or any other promotion always has someone that they can rely on. Again it's simple business logic.

I meant "early" 2000s when Austin retired and Rock left for Hollywood and WWF turned into WWE, during the Ruthless Aggression period when their top guy 2 guys were heels in HHH and Lesnar(until he left after Mania XX). There's a difference between a clear-cut babyface(like Benoit, HBK, Goldberg, RVD, etc. in that period) and someone like Hogan, Austin, etc. They don't NEED the latter.

The youth is always where WWE has shot to impress. Those kids get their parents to buy them shirts and wristbands and PPV shows. Those kids get their parents to take them to shows. Those kids want toys and such. Those kids bring in more money than the 20-somethings who are more likely to stream a PPV than buy it.

That doesn't mean you have to consistently pander to those kids when they aren't the bulk of your audience while at the same time telling you original core audience to piss off. And not for nothing but if the WWE actually gave the fans reasons to invest in their storylines/matches/feuds heading into PPVS instead of pointless filler, also put more emphasis/meaning behind the ppvs maybe they'll actually pay out the rectum for them rather than stream them.

 

[Scuba 06]

I am not responding to all your comments because its not even worth it. You sound like a complete WWE apologist, and if you cant see the obvious problems in the show, evidence which is supported by poor ratings and buyrates, I dont know what else you need. If you think WWE hasn't shoved Cena down people's throat, when he has been booed by more than 50% of nearly every arena he goes to on a consistent basis, you are really not thinking clearly. If you are a big of a wrestling fan as you appear to be, show me any other instance where the crowd responded a certain way to a character, and WWE did not act accordingly to bring the change the crowd desired. This notion that Cena being a bad guy is going to drive away fans is a bs, and no one has provided evidence that shows babyfaces turning heel lead to substantial drops in revenue.

 

[Paralyzer Z]

Improved buyrates for starters.

OK, think of this: I recall that on house show where Cena does not appear WWE has at times given the fans a refund. I shutter to think what the buyrates would be without Cena for a long period of time.

I meant "early" 2000s when Austin retired and Rock left for Hollywood and WWF turned into WWE, during the Ruthless Aggression period when their top guy 2 guys were heels in HHH and Lesnar(until he left after Mania XX). There's a difference between a clear-cut babyface(like Benoit, HBK, Goldberg, RVD, etc. in that period) and someone like Hogan, Austin, etc. They don't NEED the latter.

As far as I am concerned Brock Lesnar was a super-baby face. To the extent of Hogan or Cena? Not exactly but he like Cena was the vocal point of the company for quite sometime. You're claiming that they didn't need the latter when they did have one back then. Any point where Lesnar was heel or gone was during a time period where WWE was building the next babyface (Orton in 2004). However they got Cena as one quickly afterwards to as far as I am concerned they only went a short period without their mega-top guy.

 

[Slyfox696]

I am not responding to all your comments because its not even worth it. You sound like a complete WWE apologist, and if you cant see the obvious problems in the show, evidence which is supported by poor ratings and buyrates

That's interesting, could you elaborate on that please? You see, whenever I check the ratings, Monday Night Raw is regularly in the Top 5 of cable TV ratings. In fact, they finished second this week.

Source: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...ut-on-top-closely-followed-by-wwe-raw/122195/

Additionally, PPV revenue per show has remained consistent over the last several years, which is amazing considering the downturn in the worldwide economy.

Source: http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=207532

So when you say "poor ratings and buyrates", where are you getting your information? I get my information from Nielsen ratings and WWE's reports to the SEC. Where do you get yours?

I dont know what else you need. If you think WWE hasn't shoved Cena down people's throat, when he has been booed by more than 50% of nearly every arena he goes to on a consistent basis, you are really not thinking clearly.

On the contrary, you're the one who seems to be having trouble thinking things through. How can a wrestling promotion "shove" someone down fans throats, when that someone accounts for almost 25% of the company's revenue?

Source: http://mmapayout.com/2012/01/wwes-john-cena-brand-worth-106-million/

Don't blame the WWE for promoting John Cena, blame wrestling fans for their constant purchasing of John Cena related pro wrestling shows and merchandise.

If you are a big of a wrestling fan as you appear to be, show me any other instance where the crowd responded a certain way to a character, and WWE did not act accordingly to bring the change the crowd desired.

I fail to see your point. Why do people think the WWE cares about John Cena getting cheered? They don't. They are perfectly happy with his character, as long as it's making money. You keep talking about what the fans want, but it's obvious what the fans want. They want John Cena. And nearly 25% of the money they spend goes to supporting John Cena.

This notion that Cena being a bad guy is going to drive away fans is a bs, and no one has provided evidence that shows babyfaces turning heel lead to substantial drops in revenue.

It's called logical thinking, based upon facts. Using only this one post of yours as a guide, I can see why it would confuse you.