Putting Someone Over: Or, Why 99% of You Are Fucking Morons

[Con T.]

I want to talk about the idea of putting someone over. I've noticed a lot of threads popping up the last week, all involving the idea of putting someone over. Most of these topics go along these lines;

-John Cena is a prick for not putting Dolph Ziggler over.

-Steve Austin was a prick for not putting over Jeff Jarrett and Billy Gunn.

- The Undertaker needs to put someone over before he retires at Wrestlemania.

Putting over, putting over. Everyone wants to talk about what it takes to put someone over, and why certain wrestlers should put over other wrestlers.

Fine. Except you're all fucking rubes, who don't get jack shit what it means to put someone over, and you don't get how it works. So here's Uncle Haiku Hogan to explain it to you loud and clear, brother, why the majority of you are stupid.

1. Putting someone over is not always the same as getting the win.

This is something that seems to escape the masses, when we talk about putting someone over; this idea that you have to beat your opponent, and that you instantly attain credibility just by beating the guy, and then you get over.

Nope. Sorry.

The casual wrestling fan is much, much smarter than the IWC would like to him credit for... In a lot of ways, smarter than we are. They get it's fake, too, and they suspend their disbelief just like we do. But they also know enough to know that when a match ends in a shitty way, and someone gets "put over", but isn't properly built up to actually get put over, that it's bullshit, and it actually works against the wrestler who just got "put over".

See; Tensai, Lord. Kidman, Billy. Both of these wrestlers beat established stars in their company, and no one took them seriously. If anything, it helped work against them, and stunted their pushes.

You know who was put over perfectly? Stone Cold Steve Austin, against Bret Hart. Bret made Steve Austin a superstar one night in March in 1997. Bret took what looked like a promising superstar, and made us all see that this man could be a major player, because of how competitive Austin fought off Bret. They had us believing Steve was on Bret's level, because he battled Bret in what could have been Bret's most difficult match of his career.

You want to know the funny thing? Bret won that match against Steve Austin. How many of you remember that about their I Quit match?

Ok, better question; who thinks that was the lasting memory of that match? No one; we remember Steve passing out to the sharpshooter, refusing to give up, in spite of maybe being in over his head. When you watch Dolph Ziggler and John Cena in either match for the last two weeks, you see the same thing happening; Dolph Ziggler went toe to toe with one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. Dolph established himself as a legitimate threat, that he can compete with the greatest the WWE had to offer, and hold his own.

None of that changes, just because Dolph lost. At least, not unless you're a moron who doesn't get wrestling.

2. Getting put over is all about the booking after the match

Again, a perfect reason why the people bitch about Cena beating Ziggler are absolute morons. When you get the rub from someone, the more important thing is what you do with the rub, and what you to do keep yourself over.

We haven't even had a chance to see what they do with Dolph after his matches with Cena. So, how can we even begin to guess where he'll be aftet these matches, and how can we insinuate he won't be over? We can't, and it's ******ed to do so.

Let me go back to the Austin point I made earlier. When Wrestlemania 13 ended, they didn't halt Steve's push, just because he lost. They kept booking him the same; a redneck badass who will beat up anyone. Shock and awe, it got over; in 99% of cases, how you take the rub is more important than actually getting the win.

3. Putting someone over means following the money

Always. This actually should be the first rule, if I'm being honest. When you're deciding to put someone over, you have to see what the crowd's going to be willing to pay for.

The money isn't in Dolph Ziggler; not yet,at least. For the next month, the money is in the following programs;

A. Rock-Punk
B. The Rumble

after that, the big money is going to be in;

A. Rock-Cena II
B. Rock-Punk-Cena
C. Cena-Punk
D. Hell, maybe even Rock-Punk

Do you see Dolph Ziggler anywhere near the marquee? And if you're really clueless, let me spell it out for you, crystal clear;

Dolph Ziggler belongs absolutely nowhere near the Wrestlemania marquee yet. The money is not in Dolph Ziggler.

If there was money to be made on Dolph Ziggler right now, then we can talk. But it isn't. Follow where the money leads you; frankly, it's leading to Rock-Cena.

Steve Austin was always a smart businessman; always. He knew what was going to make money, and how you plan out that money train. In fact, when Steve Austin "took his ball and went home", he did it because Steve was going to lose to Brock Lesnar, for free, on tv, with no build.

Let me break that down a little.

He was going to lose to Brock Lesnar

for free

On TV

With no fucking build

That is a match Steve knew people would pay to see, and he was pissed that the WWE was about to burn their, and really his, payday, on a free show. Even Hulk Hogan, when he did his job to Brock Lesnar on tv, knew what he was doing; he saw the money would be in a Survivor Series match down the line, with the triumphant Hogan returning against the brute that took him out.

WWE balked because they don't like money apparently, Survivor Series was a clusterfuck that year, and it was no buys all around.

The smartest men in wrestling know when to follow the money. Steve Austin knew there wasn't money to be made in a feud with Jeff Jarrett, or Billy Gunn.

And son of a bitch, he was right. Jeff Jarrett has built his own company, and hasn't drawn a dime. It's something like that made Hulk Hogan and Steve Austin some of the richest men in wrestling. And it's what you have to be able to do in wrestling.

4. It never used to be that way in the old times. There was professionalism

Pah. What a lark.

Buddy Rogers was a cunning man who knew when to refuse to work someone, and he did early and often. This probably moves into Gelgarin territory, but Lou Thesz put his foot down when he had to. Fuck, you'll be shocked to learn Ric Flair refused to do a job or two in his day; wrestling was built on refusing to work, until you saw the money.

John Cena isn't a dick for not doing the job. Nor is Steve Austin, nor is Hulk Hogan. All of these men are working in the best interest of money.

And when the time is right, and the money's there, they will more often than not do the job.



Putting someone over
You have to know when it's time
It's about the cash

 

[dukes07]

Jesus, you are really, really angry. And wrong. Flat out wrong.

Austin turned face due to the feud with Hart and it did indeed help build him up. But Hart did not kick out of EVERY fucking finisher. He showed emotion and acted like he was injured. He did not get destroyed most of a match and win in two blows a la Lesnar. Cena gets up and acts like nothing happened. The next night he is fine and he if he lost he shows no emotion. Just standing and grinning like he is constipated as he tells the same poop jokes. "Oh my gosh, I lost, poopie, I will get him next time! Grrrr, me angry!"

How in Allah was the Cena/Ziggler feud booked well? The Austin feud continued throughout most of 97 until SummerSlam. Austin kept Hart on the run and it was booked quite well. You never knew what would happen, there was drama. With Cena you know. Every time. Besides, Ziggler will be moving on. Nothing came of his feud with Cena. Cena wins again. WWE plods on. Yeah, that is fun. Watching the same thing over and over and over.

But hey, why not keep Cena on top 9 years into his fucking career with no change to his character in years, boring the shit out of everyone over the age of 6. You have fun rooting for Cena while I will cheer for someone with actual talent and who does not have the mentality of an Alzheimer's patient constantly shitting himself.

 

[Con T.]

Jesus, you are really, really angry. And wrong. Flat out wrong.

Austin turned face due to the feud with Hart and it did indeed help build him up. But Hart did not kick out of EVERY fucking finisher. He showed emotion and acted like he was injured. He did not get destroyed most of a match and win in two blows a la Lesnar. Cena gets up and acts like nothing happened. The next night he is fine and he if he lost he shows no emotion. Just standing and grinning like he is constipated as he tells the same poop jokes. "Oh my gosh, I lost, poopie, I will get him next time! Grrrr, me angry!"

How in Allah was the Cena/Ziggler feud booked well? The Austin feud continued throughout most of 97 until SummerSlam. Austin kept Hart on the run and it was booked quite well. You never knew what would happen, there was drama. With Cena you know. Every time. Besides, Ziggler will be moving on. Nothing came of his feud with Cena. Cena wins again. WWE plods on. Yeah, that is fun. Watching the same thing over and over and over.

But hey, why not keep Cena on top 9 years into his fucking career with no change to his character in years, boring the shit out of everyone over the age of 6. You have fun rooting for Cena while I will cheer for someone with actual talent and who does not have the mentality of an Alzheimer's patient constantly shitting himself.

Great, we get it, you don't like Cena.

But clearly, you're in the minority. First, let's tackle some myths you're going with here.

1. Austin turned face because of Hart. Debatable at best, but he was getting face reactions where he was going. He didn't turn face just because of the Hart match, he turned face because he connected with the audience. If you're going to single out a character who has acted the same his career, that is Steve Austin. His character, save for one dismal run in 2001 (which lost some money, may I point out), has always been the "same".

And there isn't anything wrong with it. It's just hypocritical when you call out John Cena for being the same character, when Steve Austin has been, too.

2. You don't like Cena. Unfortunately, you're part of a minority here, especially when you consider that Cena is making the WWE assloads of money, as we speak. Cena is the WWE's top draw, and probably will be for the next five years.

Unless you have a relevant point to make in this thread regarding the subject, and not just going on a John Cena tirade, I'd suggest you read this post some more, and come back with something relevant to the discussion. After all, there is a Cena complaint thread

 

[ABMorales787]

Jesus, you are really, really angry. And wrong. Flat out wrong.

Really? He sounded pretty spot on to me.

Austin turned face due to the feud with Hart and it did indeed help build him up. But Hart did not kick out of EVERY fucking finisher. He showed emotion and acted like he was injured. He did not get destroyed most of a match and win in two blows a la Lesnar. Cena gets up and acts like nothing happened. The next night he is fine and he if he lost he shows no emotion. Just standing and grinning like he is constipated as he tells the same poop jokes. "Oh my gosh, I lost, poopie, I will get him next time! Grrrr, me angry!"

Funny, I remember a story running after Extreme Rules where Cena was attacked still injured which was why Johnny Ace felt so confident that he could wrestle him. But more importantly, just what the fuck do you expect out of someone who losses? Retirement?

How in Allah was the Cena/Ziggler feud booked well? The Austin feud continued throughout most of 97 until SummerSlam. Austin kept Hart on the run and it was booked quite well. You never knew what would happen, there was drama. With Cena you know. Every time. Besides, Ziggler will be moving on. Nothing came of his feud with Cena. Cena wins again. WWE plods on. Yeah, that is fun. Watching the same thing over and over and over.

Nothing but a win on a PPV main event over him and a new stable under his name. At least get your facts straight.

But hey, why not keep Cena on top 9 years into his fucking career with no change to his character in years, boring the shit out of everyone over the age of 6. You have fun rooting for Cena while I will cheer for someone with actual talent and who does not have the mentality of an Alzheimer's patient constantly shitting himself.

Weird. You say he's been the same for 9 years? Color me crazy but he was totally generic in 2002, a comedy character in 2003, a midcard face who rapped in 2004, a rapper in 2005, a rebel in 2006-7, I've made my point. And personally I fail to see the issue with staying the same for years. It's worked for Kane, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, why not Cena? The real bore is Dolph Ziggler. Who had to be carried by Vicke Guerrero and now needs a full stable to cover his lacking in the heat attracting department.

 

[dukes07]

Great, we get it, you don't like Cena.

But clearly, you're in the minority. First, let's tackle some myths you're going with here.

1. Austin turned face because of Hart. Debatable at best, but he was getting face reactions where he was going. He didn't turn face just because of the Hart match, he turned face because he connected with the audience. If you're going to single out a character who has acted the same his career, that is Steve Austin. His character, save for one dismal run in 2001 (which lost some money, may I point out), has always been the "same".

And there isn't anything wrong with it. It's just hypocritical when you call out John Cena for being the same character, when Steve Austin has been, too.

2. You don't like Cena. Unfortunately, you're part of a minority here, especially when you consider that Cena is making the WWE assloads of money, as we speak. Cena is the WWE's top draw, and probably will be for the next five years.

Unless you have a relevant point to make in this thread regarding the subject, and not just going on a John Cena tirade, I'd suggest you read this post some more, and come back with something relevant to the discussion. After all, there is a Cena complaint thread

What? Not in an Austin way either....Well maybe.

Of course I went on an anti-Cena tirade because your initial post was generally about him and why he should not put over Ziggler. Oh sure, there were other points being made but you know that the main focus was so you could put over Cena.

I am fine with being in the minority. Cena is terrible. I mean, I cannot recall one feud he has been in that has had drama or been interesting.

As for Austin being the same. I agree that his character got really tiresome. But at the same time he was interesting to watch and had charisma as well as actual talent. Compare an Austin promo to a Cena promo. Finally, Austin's feud with Hart is far superior than anything than Cena has ever done.

Hey great, Cena is making WWE money. But that cash cow is going to dry up. Also, who did Austin/Hogan/HHH put over at the end of their career when it was winding down? There was the Ultimate Warrior but he was already over and bat shit insane and a shitty wrestler to boot. So that is it until 02 for Hogan.

As for Kidman? Are you talking about Hogan? They made Kidman look like a bitch, only winning with help from Jesus himself. And in the end he was tossed in a fucking dumpster. That is not how you put anyone over.

 

[Con T.]

What? Not in an Austin way either....Well maybe.

Of course I went on an anti-Cena tirade because your initial post was generally about him and why he should not put over Ziggler. Oh sure, there were other points being made but you know that the main focus was so you could put over Cena.

I am fine with being in the minority. Cena is terrible. I mean, I cannot recall one feud he has been in that has had drama or been interesting.

As for Austin being the same. I agree that his character got really tiresome. But at the same time he was interesting to watch and had charisma as well as actual talent. Compare an Austin promo to a Cena promo. Finally, Austin's feud with Hart is far superior than anything than Cena has ever done.

Hey great, Cena is making WWE money. But that cash cow is going to dry up. Also, who did Austin/Hogan/HHH put over at the end of their career when it was winding down? There was the Ultimate Warrior but he was already over and bat shit insane and a shitty wrestler to boot. So that is it until 02 for Hogan.

As for Kidman? Are you talking about Hogan? They made Kidman look like a bitch, only winning with help from Jesus himself. And in the end he was tossed in a fucking dumpster. That is not how you put anyone over.

Um, no, my point is that you have no idea what it means to put someone over. Thank you, again, for proving my point.

I don't think I mention Cena past the second rule I placed. But fine, if you want to turn this into a Cena thread, let me be clear for you;

You don't get wrestling, and you're a moron. I get it, you don't like Cena, but if you don't understand that without Cena, WW is right fucked, then you are clueless.

Do we really need to do this? Because I can; Hogan gave the rub to;

Savage, a hall of fame wrestler
The Undertaker, a hall of fame wrestler
Warrior, who while not as good, still a valuable member to WWE's history

Again, you're focusing too much on the idea that you have to win to get put over. Rock got more over because of his losses to Austin, as he was made to look like a competitive force to the biggest wrestler in the company. Sounds just like what Cena did to Ziggler

Oh, and Triple H made Batista and Randy Orton.

Thank you for proving my point

 

[dukes07]

Really? He sounded pretty spot on to me.


Funny, I remember a story running after Extreme Rules where Cena was attacked still injured which was why Johnny Ace felt so confident that he could wrestle him. But more importantly, just what the fuck do you expect out of someone who losses? Retirement?


Nothing but a win on a PPV main event over him and a new stable under his name. At least get your facts straight.


Weird. You say he's been the same for 9 years? Color me crazy but he was totally generic in 2002, a comedy character in 2003, a midcard face who rapped in 2004, a rapper in 2005, a rebel in 2006-7, I've made my point. And personally I fail to see the issue with staying the same for years. It's worked for Kane, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, why not Cena? The real bore is Dolph Ziggler. Who had to be carried by Vicke Guerrero and now needs a full stable to cover his lacking in the heat attracting department.

Hmmm. Kind of odd when every male in the building boos Cena while Ziggler chants echo. It is hard to get over when you have to job week after week. Yet the fans still respond positively anyway. His PPV win was via cheating. Then he got clobbered the next few weeks. Like I said, nothing came of it.

But you don't respond to the fact that every Cena feud is the same. There is no drama. That none are good. That he no sells. That his promos are shit.

Get your Cena gear ready for when he becomes champ after WM, beating the Rock! Good times ahead. Hustle and Loyalty baby! Cena 4 Life!

 

[dukes07]

Um, no, my point is that you have no idea what it means to put someone over. Thank you, again, for proving my point.

I don't think I mention Cena past the second rule I placed. But fine, if you want to turn this into a Cena thread, let me be clear for you;

You don't get wrestling, and you're a moron. I get it, you don't like Cena, but if you don't understand that without Cena, WW is right fucked, then you are clueless.

Do we really need to do this? Because I can; Hogan gave the rub to;

Savage, a hall of fame wrestler
The Undertaker, a hall of fame wrestler
Warrior, who while not as good, still a valuable member to WWE's history

Again, you're focusing too much on the idea that you have to win to get put over. Rock got more over because of his losses to Austin, as he was made to look like a competitive force to the biggest wrestler in the company. Sounds just like what Cena did to Ziggler

Oh, and Triple H made Batista and Randy Orton.

Thank you for proving my point

Okay, so we are going to resort to name calling. Sure. Your point was not proven as I disproved your comparison to Austin. As for Kidman, he never went over. That feud was a sign of how not to book. It was crash Russo bullshit with Bischoff bringing up the rear.

You don't have to win to get put over. I never said that. But you have to win sometimes. Did Western Carolina get a "rub" for playing and getting their asses kicked by Alabama. Who the fuck remembers the team that lost the Super Bowl. Oh hey, New England went 18-0 but they lost the Super Bowl. Man what a great....No, it means shit if it goes nowhere. Same with the 2001 Mariners.

On another note: This mythical rub you like to talk about a lot, do you happen to *********e a lot? Nothing wrong if you do, even if it is to Cena as it is 2013.

As for Savage when the fuck did he put Savage over? Savage never beat him. It took Hogan's help to win the title. In fact most pundits always talk about how Savage lived under Hogan's shadow, hurting his career. Rock was a heel when he lost to Austin, it precipitated his face turn. But yeah, they played off well one another and it did not hurt his career losing to Austin. In fact he had to lose there. Rock made himself get over and he was getting over by 98. He was more than over for their 2001 rematch. A loss to Austin did not hurt him. In fact the Rock has gone out of his way, like Foley to help make bigger stars. Sure it helps to wrestle them. I am not saying that losing to Cena or HHH or Austin ends your career that it cannot help it out. But if you lose over and over again, such as how the WWE books heels then yes, it is going to hurt your career. Wins and losses do indeed matter. And when you talk about the Warrior getting that damn "rub" he beat Hogan! He beat him and it helped his career but he was also bat shit insane and a shitty worker. So yes, wins and losses do matter. There are other factors involved of course but to discount a major star putting over a lesser one and then FOLLOWING through can do wonders for their career...e.g. DDP.

As for HHH putting over Orton? Did you watch 2004 and how the next night that Orton won the title Trips buried him and then again at WM XXV? The only thing Trips has put over is Jack and shit and he never wrestled anyone named Jack (Well, he did beat Foley).

 

[dman1373]

Great, we get it, you don't like Cena.

But clearly, you're in the minority. First, let's tackle some myths you're going with here.

1. Austin turned face because of Hart. Debatable at best, but he was getting face reactions where he was going. He didn't turn face just because of the Hart match, he turned face because he connected with the audience. If you're going to single out a character who has acted the same his career, that is Steve Austin. His character, save for one dismal run in 2001 (which lost some money, may I point out), has always been the "same".

And there isn't anything wrong with it. It's just hypocritical when you call out John Cena for being the same character, when Steve Austin has been, too.

2. You don't like Cena. Unfortunately, you're part of a minority here, especially when you consider that Cena is making the WWE assloads of money, as we speak. Cena is the WWE's top draw, and probably will be for the next five years.

Unless you have a relevant point to make in this thread regarding the subject, and not just going on a John Cena tirade, I'd suggest you read this post some more, and come back with something relevant to the discussion. After all, there is a Cena complaint thread

first i would like you guys to know i am typing on the wii u so i wont go on for too long as its pretty hard to type.

now to tackle your first statement. stone cold infact did turn face because of bret hart. particially because he showed alot of heart not tapping out and partially because he was in a fued with bret hart who became a heel. before this he was a heel that just so happend to get cheers just like ziggler or punk today.

Now when you say austin lost money in 2001 you sound ridiculous. they had atleast in the 4s with ratings on raw while all there other shows were doing better than smackdown is now. So if wwe was losing money then there losing money now too, which if you saw the profit this year, you would know thats bullsit.

 

[Con T.]

Okay, so we are going to resort to name calling. Sure. Your point was not proven as I disproved your comparison to Austin. As for Kidman, he never went over. That feud was a sign of how not to book. It was crash Russo bullshit with Bischoff bringing up the rear.

Legitimate question; you do have Aspergers, right?

I fucking said Kidman is a sign of how to not book someone to get over. You didn't do jack shit with my Austin comparison; please, explain that one to me.

You don't have to win to get put over. I never said that. But you have to win sometimes. Did Western Carolina get a "rub" for playing and getting their asses kicked by Alabama. Who the fuck remembers the team that lost the Super Bowl. Oh hey, New England went 18-0 but they lost the Super Bowl. Man what a great....No, it means shit if it goes nowhere. Same with the 2001 Mariners.

So we're comparing staged theater to real sports?

Again.... Aspergers, right?

As for Savage when the fuck did he put Savage over? Savage never beat him. It took Hogan's help to win the title. In fact most pundits always talk about how Savage lived under Hogan's shadow, hurting his career. Rock was a heel when he lost to Austin, it precipitated his face turn. But yeah, they played off well one another and it did not hurt his career losing to Austin. In fact he had to lose there. Rock made himself get over and he was getting over by 98. He was more than over for their 2001 rematch. A loss to Austin did not hurt him. In fact the Rock has gone out of his way, like Foley to help make bigger stars. Sure it helps to wrestle them. I am not saying that losing to Cena or HHH or Austin ends your career that it cannot help it out. But if you lose over and over again, such as how the WWE books heels then yes, it is going to hurt your career. Wins and losses do indeed matter. And when you talk about the Warrior getting that damn "rub" he beat Hogan! He beat him and it helped his career but he was also bat shit insane and a shitty worker. So yes, wins and losses do matter. There are other factors involved of course but to discount a major star putting over a lesser one and then FOLLOWING through can do wonders for their career...e.g. DDP.

did you miss the point that it doesn't take a win to get a rub?

Before Savage joined up with Hogan, Savage was a mid card name who had great matches, but was stuck in the mid card. It wasn't until The Mega Powers formed that Savage became a legendary name.

Your Warrior point would hold merit, were it not for the fact that Warrior fizzled out in a year, would get released, and was seen by most as a flop as a champion... Your point?

As for HHH putting over Orton? Did you watch 2004 and how the next night that Orton won the title Trips buried him and then again at WM XXV? The only thing Trips has put over is Jack and shit and he never wrestled anyone named Jack (Well, he did beat Foley).

Did you forget Batista?

I bet Aspergers does that to a person. Oh, and that wasn't so much a burial, as it was face turn. Notice how Randy Orton became a main eventer since then, all from that Evolution turn?

 

[Con T.]

first i would like you guys to know i am typing on the wii u so i wont go on for too long as its pretty hard to type.

now to tackle your first statement. stone cold infact did turn face because of bret hart. particially because he showed alot of heart not tapping out and partially because he was in a fued with bret hart who became a heel. before this he was a heel that just so happend to get cheers just like ziggler or punk today.

That's the exact same thing as his heel character, I think you missed the point, completely, actually.

Now when you say austin lost money in 2001 you sound ridiculous. they had atleast in the 4s with ratings on raw while all there other shows were doing better than smackdown is now. So if wwe was losing money then there losing money now too, which if you saw the profit this year, you would know thats bullsit.

2000 was one of the most successful years, business wise, for the WWF, in terms of their wrestling corporation. By 2001, they would barely make half what they did in 2001.

Sounds like lost money to me. Again, we're wrangling in the aspies tonight

 

[klunderbunker]

Let's see if Old KB can clear up a few things here.

1. Austin got over because of Bret Hart's actions. He also got over because of the way he was speaking and the promos that he cut which were capturing the audience. The fact that the matches were blowing the doors off of everything else the company was doing at the time had a lot to do with it too. Make no mistake about it though: Bret was a key player if not THE key player in getting Austin over, even if Austin never pinned Bret.

2. Cena has been around for ten and a half years, not 9. Learn basic math people.

3. In that time, Cena's character has indeed evolved. He went from generic aggressive guy to heel rapper to face rapper to guy who occasionally rhymed but had good matches and wore a chain to guy who rhymed once in a blue moon, had VERY god matches and wore jean shorts to a guy who thought he was a Marine to a guy who had great matches and loved America and the WWE to a guy who makes jokes aimed at 12 year olds.

To say Cena's character hasn't changed is completely wrong.

4. To suggest that Ziggler has gotten nothing out of Cena is ridiculous. First and foremost, he got AJ, which means he got away from Vickie, which is the best thing that's happened to him in a long time.

Second, he beat John Cena on PPV, meaning he can join the new Dynamic Dudes.

Third, he's rubbing elbows with John Cena and is the sole focus of John Cena's attention. The fact that he's in that spot and having competitive matches with Cena says a lot about WWE's confidence in him.

Whatever numberth we're on now, did I mention he gets AJ in those little shorts of hers?

Fifth, he's getting A LOT more mic time and he gets to be serious with it. That's a good sign.

Ziggler is long past the point where he should have been world champion given how his push has gone. To suggest that Cena is holding him down is ridiculous. Dolph could have and should have been world champion YEARS ago and now the time for him to really get the belt has passed.

Cena is giving him another rub and the fact that Ziggler is being put with the most popular wrestler in the world is a very good sign for what the WWE thinks of him.

 

[dukes07]

Legitimate question; you do have Aspergers, right?

I fucking said Kidman is a sign of how to not book someone to get over. You didn't do jack shit with my Austin comparison; please, explain that one to me.



So we're comparing staged theater to real sports?

Again.... Aspergers, right?




did you miss the point that it doesn't take a win to get a rub?

Before Savage joined up with Hogan, Savage was a mid card name who had great matches, but was stuck in the mid card. It wasn't until The Mega Powers formed that Savage became a legendary name.

Your Warrior point would hold merit, were it not for the fact that Warrior fizzled out in a year, would get released, and was seen by most as a flop as a champion... Your point?



Did you forget Batista?

I bet Aspergers does that to a person. Oh, and that wasn't so much a burial, as it was face turn. Notice how Randy Orton became a main eventer since then, all from that Evolution turn?

So now you are making fun of mental disabilities. I take it you are a virgin. Do you burn crosses at night?

Dude, you brought up Warrior and then discount it. Whatever floats your boat.

The Megapowers were formed after Savage won the title! Did you watch wrestling then. Savage was already over. If anything Hogan held him back because they kept attaching him to Hogan and did the same thing in WCW.

As for Austin. He was already over too. Bret certainly helped but the WWF booked it intelligently by keeping both Austin and Bret strong. In fact had it all worked out Austin would have ended up beating him for the belt or at least getting his win back. Had Austin kept losing to Bret, or been made to look like a bitch despite trying really, really hard he would not have been as over as he became. Cena nor HHH provide that to their opponents.

Orton: Evolution undoubtedly helped, and I am not an Orton fan, but at the same time it was his moniker as a Legend Killer that got him over. BEATING PEOPLE. He wins the title and then drops it to Trips. There is no rub there.

As for my sports analogy. It does make sense: Wins and losses matter. Wrestling may be scripted but you need to win. Just because you are in the ring with a so-called legend does not mean you should get down on your hands and knees to suck his dick. Sure, it can help your career if he makes you look good but if you lose all the time or only win by having the whole world crash down on the face you are wrestling (face as in good guy) then it does little good.

My question is who has gotten your now famous RUB (Trademark that bitch) from Cena? I am sure it has happened but I will be damned if I can think of someone. Or who has Trips given the rub to, by just being in the ring with him? Not many. Batista is remembered for, guess what, beating HHH. That helped his career. He beat him.

Undoubtedly if the follow up is not well done such as with Shelton Benjamin the fault lies less with the wrestler and more with the booking. Well, I am sure it can be spread around to both as well.

But, so you don't go on some sort of rampage: Wins and losses don't always matter. There are a lot of factors that go into it. But they are also really important and can help make or break a career.

 

[The Butcher]

Is this the 1990 Royal Rumble? I ask because Hogan is winning.

I really think debates like this would be a little more avoidable if we dropped the wrestling business lexicon and used plain English. Instead of "putting over" we could say "help."

Did it help Randy Savage to be associated with Hulk Hogan? Of course it did.

Did it help Steve Austin to show grit and not give up in his WM13 bout against Bret Hart? Undeniably.

Did it help The Rock to give Austin a run for his money twice at 'Mania, albeit in losing efforts? Absolutely.

Did it help Randy Orton to be associated with, and turned on by, Triple H? You'd better believe it did.

Will it help Dolph Ziggler as he pulls out all the stops against John Cena? Time will tell, but the smart money is on "yes."

Insider terms are abused by the IWC. "Put over," "buried," "jobber," etc. all get thrown around so much. I've seen it on every board I've read or posted on in the past. If you think of it in simple terms, it's a lot clearer.

 

[dukes07]

Let's see if Old KB can clear up a few things here.

1. Austin got over because of Bret Hart's actions. He also got over because of the way he was speaking and the promos that he cut which were capturing the audience. The fact that the matches were blowing the doors off of everything else the company was doing at the time had a lot to do with it too. Make no mistake about it though: Bret was a key player if not THE key player in getting Austin over, even if Austin never pinned Bret.

2. Cena has been around for ten and a half years, not 9. Learn basic math people.

3. In that time, Cena's character has indeed evolved. He went from generic aggressive guy to heel rapper to face rapper to guy who occasionally rhymed but had good matches and wore a chain to guy who rhymed once in a blue moon, had VERY god matches and wore jean shorts to a guy who thought he was a Marine to a guy who had great matches and loved America and the WWE to a guy who makes jokes aimed at 12 year olds.

To say Cena's character hasn't changed is completely wrong.

4. To suggest that Ziggler has gotten nothing out of Cena is ridiculous. First and foremost, he got AJ, which means he got away from Vickie, which is the best thing that's happened to him in a long time.

Second, he beat John Cena on PPV, meaning he can join the new Dynamic Dudes.

Third, he's rubbing elbows with John Cena and is the sole focus of John Cena's attention. The fact that he's in that spot and having competitive matches with Cena says a lot about WWE's confidence in him.

Whatever numberth we're on now, did I mention he gets AJ in those little shorts of hers?

Fifth, he's getting A LOT more mic time and he gets to be serious with it. That's a good sign.

Ziggler is long past the point where he should have been world champion given how his push has gone. To suggest that Cena is holding him down is ridiculous. Dolph could have and should have been world champion YEARS ago and now the time for him to really get the belt has passed.

Cena is giving him another rub and the fact that Ziggler is being put with the most popular wrestler in the world is a very good sign for what the WWE thinks of him.

All messing around about Cena aside. He has indeed changed over the years. None for the better,and at the same time, WWE fears to pull the trigger on new things. Long-term. Short-term they do some kick ass things, for example the Nexus, Summer of Punk, Lesnar and hopefully the Shield will end that streak. Also, had the WWE put over Ziggler and then had him cash in his MitB case, I would argue that that would have made him far more effective. I stand by the fact that there is no drama. When you get hit with every finisher along with interference and still win, nearly every time then it is going to hurt the opponent. The last two wins on RAW were pretty ridiculous.

But let's say hypothetically they put the belt on Ziggler. He beats ADR or whomever. Then they revisit the Cena feud. And they decide to put over Ziggler cleanly. Now that is a rub. You have another potential moneymaker. A heel who can defeat Cena, a heel who is a threat and not just a coward who has to cheat all the time to win. Now you have some drama.

Guys need to use the talent they are given to get over, and their charisma but they need help from booking. If Ziggler is not going to look all the competitive in his feud with Cena it is not going to help him. The same with Swagger and Rey Mysterio. If they then don't get over after winning then that is all on them.

It only takes one big win or even incident to get the ball rolling. Nexus got it rolling, it was aborted. DDP took out the Outsiders and WCW ran with it.

As for Austin and Hart: They had matches that were better than pretty much anything that WCW/WWF had to offer at the time. They made Austin look strong and the two played well off one another.

WWE has to appeal to as broad a spectrum as possible. Cena for the kids and Punk or Rock or Lesnar for the adults. You have to find that balance. Sometimes it works and lately more often than not it doesn't.

 

[Con T.]

Ah, let's see exactly how many things Dukes can get wrong in one post. As a matter of fact, because I'm watching an episode of NXT, why don't we use the help of my buddy, The Count.

Dude, you brought up Warrior and then discount it. Whatever floats your boat.

I brought up Warrior one time, to fit into your little fixated position of putting someone over. Other than being a throwaway name, that's it; I won't argue he was absolutely over, but like I pointed to in the first post, unless you do something great after the rub, you're not going to make it.

The Megapowers were formed after Savage won the title! Did you watch wrestling then. Savage was already over. If anything Hogan held him back because they kept attaching him to Hogan and did the same thing in WCW.

Did you miss the Saturday Night Main Event, with Honky Tonk Man threatening to bash a guitar over Savage's head?

Who came out to make the save?

That's right, Hulk Beatrude Hogan.

As for Austin. He was already over too. Bret certainly helped but the WWF booked it intelligently by keeping both Austin and Bret strong. In fact had it all worked out Austin would have ended up beating him for the belt or at least getting his win back. Had Austin kept losing to Bret, or been made to look like a bitch despite trying really, really hard he would not have been as over as he became. Cena nor HHH provide that to their opponents.

\\

And Ziggler hasn't looked like a bitch against Cena. He's been competitive and pushed Cena to his limits

Orton: Evolution undoubtedly helped, and I am not an Orton fan, but at the same time it was his moniker as a Legend Killer that got him over. BEATING PEOPLE. He wins the title and then drops it to Trips. There is no rub there

.

So you mean to tell me Randy Orton was still going to remain over just by beating the likes of Sargeant Slaughter, and the returning legends that would come around?

Let me ask you; even after getting "buried" by Triple H, did Randy Orton ever sink back to the mid card, like he was in as a lackey in Evolution?

As for my sports analogy. It does make sense: Wins and losses matter. Wrestling may be scripted but you need to win. Just because you are in the ring with a so-called legend does not mean you should get down on your hands and knees to suck his dick. Sure, it can help your career if he makes you look good but if you lose all the time or only win by having the whole world crash down on the face you are wrestling (face as in good guy) then it does little good.

Ric Flair made a career out of jobbing; seems to be fine for him.

All I'm saying is, you're generalizing a statement far too much to make a good point. Sure, people need to win, but a guy can look fantastic in defeat, just like Ziggler did in his matches with Ziggler.

My question is who has gotten your now famous RUB (Trademark that bitch) from Cena? I am sure it has happened but I will be damned if I can think of someone.

How's about CM Punk? Do anything for you?

 

[dukes07]

Is this the 1990 Royal Rumble? I ask because Hogan is winning.

I really think debates like this would be a little more avoidable if we dropped the wrestling business lexicon and used plain English. Instead of "putting over" we could say "help."

Did it help Randy Savage to be associated with Hulk Hogan? Of course it did.

Did it help Steve Austin to show grit and not give up in his WM13 bout against Bret Hart? Undeniably.

Did it help The Rock to give Austin a run for his money twice at 'Mania, albeit in losing efforts? Absolutely.

Did it help Randy Orton to be associated with, and turned on by, Triple H? You'd better believe it did.

Will it help Dolph Ziggler as he pulls out all the stops against John Cena? Time will tell, but the smart money is on "yes."

Insider terms are abused by the IWC. "Put over," "buried," "jobber," etc. all get thrown around so much. I've seen it on every board I've read or posted on in the past. If you think of it in simple terms, it's a lot clearer.

Funny how you mention, winning. Hmmmm.

See here is the fallacy:

I will keep this as short and sweet as possible. Working with others can indeed help, as it depends on how it is followed up.

I disagree with a lot of your examples such as Orton, I would say it set him back. The same goes with Savage. After his work at WMV, he fought in the upper-mid-card as the focus became Hogan again. Many other people would agree with that. It is all subjective.

But like I have said again and again, if HHH and Cena are so great that just by being in the ring with them, means you are getting rubbed on then why does the WWE struggle so mightily to find new stars?

Winning is certainly not the only factor but it is a damn big factor, it can undoubtedly help a career. It does not have to be hotshotted or if it does it needs to be properly built on. This whole premise that Hogan and Cena and others have the best interest of the company in mind and will do the job when necessary is silly. It is about the money but they are looking out for their careers too and there is nothing wrong with that. Where it can hurt a company is if you don't use those stars to build towards the future without taking away their money making capabilities. Austin beating the Rock did not hurt the WWF because the Rock was already established and vice-versa. But once they left the WWE floundered as they did after Hogan left because they did not prepare as well as they should have.

 

[klunderbunker]

All messing around about Cena aside. He has indeed changed over the years. None for the better,and at the same time, WWE fears to pull the trigger on new things. Long-term. Short-term they do some kick ass things, for example the Nexus, Summer of Punk, Lesnar and hopefully the Shield will end that streak. Also, had the WWE put over Ziggler and then had him cash in his MitB case, I would argue that that would have made him far more effective. I stand by the fact that there is no drama. When you get hit with every finisher along with interference and still win, nearly every time then it is going to hurt the opponent. The last two wins on RAW were pretty ridiculous.

The audibly loud gasps from the fans would seem to disagree with the "lack of drama" theory.

But let's say hypothetically they put the belt on Ziggler.

Why they would want to do that mere months before Mania when he isn't going to defend it there is beyond me but sure why not.

He beats ADR or whomever. Then they revisit the Cena feud.

....why? Cena is going to be busy with someone who matters at Mania time and likely for the months after it, not Ziggler.

And they decide to put over Ziggler cleanly.

So he turns face? That's usually what happens when you put someone over clean. There's a reason heels cheat to win: it's because they're heels.

Now that is a rub.

Like the one he's been getting. Got it.

You have another potential moneymaker.

No, you have a new champion who hasn't drawn money yet as a challenger and has gotten beaten up for the last year and a half. Why would people pay money to see him again now that he's supposed to be awesome yet is doing the same stuff?

A heel who can defeat Cena,

You mean like almost every heel has done already?

a heel who is a threat and not just a coward who has to cheat all the time to win.

So.....a face?

Now you have some drama.

Not really. You have Cena losing to a guy he's beaten time and time again with one win not changing much about Ziggler's past. That's not drama. It's stupid booking.

Guys need to use the talent they are given to get over,

This makes no sense. You've spent hours now talking about how Cena needs to give a rub to someone yet now you say that the primary way to get over is their own talent?

and their charisma but they need help from booking.

Wait which is it?

If Ziggler is not going to look all the competitive in his feud with Cena

See, now it's clear you're just trying to bash Cena. The matches have been incredibly competitive. Ziggler not winning doesn't mean he isn't competitive against Cena. It means he's not successful.

it is not going to help him. The same with Swagger and Rey Mysterio. If they then don't get over after winning then that is all on them.

So now that Ziggler has beaten Cena clean on a bigger stage than Raw (TLC in case you're having trouble keeping up), it's his fault that he's not over, so we need to job Cena to further the push of a guy who isn't getting over already?

It only takes one big win or even incident to get the ball rolling.

Which Ziggler got at TLC.

As for Austin and Hart: They had matches that were better than pretty much anything that WCW/WWF had to offer at the time. They made Austin look strong and the two played well off one another.

Thank you for repeating what I already said.

WWE has to appeal to as broad a spectrum as possible. Cena for the kids and Punk or Rock or Lesnar for the adults. You have to find that balance. Sometimes it works and lately more often than not it doesn't.

Cena vs. Rock and Punk vs. Jericho with no Lesnar or Ziggler to be found in the main event drew more money than any PPV in the history of wrestling. I think they've found that broad spectrum.

 

[The Butcher]

Funny how you mention, winning. Hmmmm.

It is funny, because if you were giving a better performance, it could be said that he's putting you over.

I disagree with a lot of your examples such as Orton, I would say it set him back. The same goes with Savage. After his work at WMV, he fought in the upper-mid-card as the focus became Hogan again. Many other people would agree with that. It is all subjective.

Actually he introduced Zeus and went on to main event SummerSlam and a special "No Holds Barred: The Match/The Movie" PPV. And of course the focus was Hogan. Give us a break.

But like I have said again and again, if HHH and Cena are so great that just by being in the ring with them, means you are getting rubbed on then why does the WWE struggle so mightily to find new stars?

Sheamus, Punk, Ziggles, Daniel Bryan, Ryback... the new stars thing was an issue a few years back, not so much today.

Winning is certainly not the only factor but it is a damn big factor, it can undoubtedly help a career. It does not have to be hotshotted or if it does it needs to be properly built on. This whole premise that Hogan and Cena and others have the best interest of the company in mind and will do the job when necessary is silly. It is about the money but they are looking out for their careers too and there is nothing wrong with that. Where it can hurt a company is if you don't use those stars to build towards the future without taking away their money making capabilities. Austin beating the Rock did not hurt the WWF because the Rock was already established and vice-versa. But once they left the WWE floundered as they did after Hogan left because they did not prepare as well as they should have.

It's been said a thousand times- the wrestling business is cyclical. The bubble builds up, then bursts, then builds up again. You don't just replace a Hogan, Austin, or Cena. If it were so easy, I'm sure they'd be doing it. But hey, I'm starting to think you just like to argue for fun, so I'm gonna have to stop doing this song and dance with ya for a while bud.

 

[dukes07]

The audibly loud gasps from the fans would seem to disagree with the "lack of drama" theory.



Why they would want to do that mere months before Mania when he isn't going to defend it there is beyond me but sure why not.


....why? Cena is going to be busy with someone who matters at Mania time and likely for the months after it, not Ziggler.



So he turns face? That's usually what happens when you put someone over clean. There's a reason heels cheat to win: it's because they're heels.


Like the one he's been getting. Got it.


No, you have a new champion who hasn't drawn money yet as a challenger and has gotten beaten up for the last year and a half. Why would people pay money to see him again now that he's supposed to be awesome yet is doing the same stuff?



You mean like almost every heel has done already?


So.....a face?



Not really. You have Cena losing to a guy he's beaten time and time again with one win not changing much about Ziggler's past. That's not drama. It's stupid booking.



This makes no sense. You've spent hours now talking about how Cena needs to give a rub to someone yet now you say that the primary way to get over is their own talent?



Wait which is it?



See, now it's clear you're just trying to bash Cena. The matches have been incredibly competitive. Ziggler not winning doesn't mean he isn't competitive against Cena. It means he's not successful.


So now that Ziggler has beaten Cena clean on a bigger stage than Raw (TLC in case you're having trouble keeping up), it's his fault that he's not over, so we need to job Cena to further the push of a guy who isn't getting over already?



Which Ziggler got at TLC.


Thank you for repeating what I already said.



Cena vs. Rock and Punk vs. Jericho with no Lesnar or Ziggler to be found in the main event drew more money than any PPV in the history of wrestling. I think they've found that broad spectrum.

So if Ziggler has been getting his ass kicked for the last year and a half then why give him the case? Everything is multi-causal: You need talent, which Ziggler has and he has some charisma and he needs to be booked strong. Give him that breakthrough win, and follow up on it. I would have liked to see a clean victory, nothing wrong with that. If he beat Cena cleanly it would not hurt Cena.

So with Ziggler already a punching bag as you say, then this feud was just one in many that ended with Ziggler losing, so it is ultimately going to do nothing for him.

As for having the title at WM. It is the WCW title that WWE pretty much treats as a second rate title for the most part. So if has it then so what? He faces an Orton or a Sheamus or an ADR.

As for Austin and Bret: That is what I posted in my first post. I never disagreed.

Ziggler did win at TLC but the follow up was piss poor. Even the Observer agrees with that. The crowd at the PPV was also heavily behind Ziggler, so he is over in many places and has a lot of potential.

Not all heels have to be cowards. The beauty is in the chase. Some play the cowardly role to perfection and there are bad-ass heels throughout history. I just postulated that I would like a strongly booked heel besides Punk. You don't like that, so they have to be a face.

The funny thing is: I am not that big of a fan of Ziggler. He is fun to watch, nothing more. But you keep mentioning that I am bashing Cena as you go after Ziggler and say Ziggler beating Cena or getting booked strongly would be stupid as the fans know about all the past losses. But Vince and others here believe that wins and losses don't matter. So if wins don't matter and the WWE banks on the fans not knowing that then why would booking Ziggler strong be considered stupid? Wrestling fans are supposed to have short term memory only. What is stupid booking is having Cena no sell everything and win all the time. No one in WWE is a threat to him. They have to bring in outside guys such as the Rock.

I am not sure what crowd you are listening to, but they seem to be heavily pro-Ziggler when he faces Cena. But it seems that you see things through a different pro-Cena lens and that is fine. And the matches are competitive? No the last two weeks were not. I think you need to get your eyes and ears checked.

 

[dukes07]

It is funny, because if you were giving a better performance, it could be said that he's putting you over.



Actually he introduced Zeus and went on to main event SummerSlam and a special "No Holds Barred: The Match/The Movie" PPV. And of course the focus was Hogan. Give us a break.



Sheamus, Punk, Ziggles, Daniel Bryan, Ryback... the new stars thing was an issue a few years back, not so much today.



It's been said a thousand times- the wrestling business is cyclical. The bubble builds up, then bursts, then builds up again. You don't just replace a Hogan, Austin, or Cena. If it were so easy, I'm sure they'd be doing it. But hey, I'm starting to think you just like to argue for fun, so I'm gonna have to stop doing this song and dance with ya for a while bud.

I do like to argue. But I don't like Cena. That part is correct. I do see why they push them though: He makes money. But I also think they need to build better for the future. You have to take chances. I have never said Cena needs to be a jobber. But he could be used more effectively.

As for the cyclical part: It has been down for a long time. Monopolies don't work. WCW fans left for obvious reasons. More options on TV and the Internet. NFL got even bigger and there is MMA, plus wrestling just began to stagnate.

As for Savage: I forgot about Zeus. I was thinking of Dusty Rhodes. I got way ahead of myself. But Savage did indeed live in the shadow of Hogan according to many pundits. I would argue that Hogan held him back more often than not.

Ultimately in order to help get over you do need to win. But yes, some of the great feuds don't always involved trading wins etc. Sometimes they are dominated. However, one reason the nWo got so old was because they kept winning and WCW to many was looked on as a joke. They were not competitive. The fans knew that the nWo would win. Sure they were making money hand over fist but WCW did not adapt in time. They struggled once the nWo disbanded to recapture that magic and could not.

 

[klunderbunker]

Gah learn how to quote stuff.

So if Ziggler has been getting his ass kicked for the last year and a half then why give him the case?

Because the MITB case is believed to be an easy way to get people to forget everything that happened before, which doesn't work.

Everything is multi-causal: You need talent, which Ziggler has and he has some charisma and he needs to be booked strong.

He's a triple crown winner that beat Cena at the last PPV. That's pretty freaking strong.

Give him that breakthrough win,

Check.

and follow up on it.

Check.

I would have liked to see a clean victory, nothing wrong with that.

Nope, which is why he got one already.

If he beat Cena cleanly it would not hurt Cena.

It would hurt Ziggler though, as it would be wasted coming into Mania season.

So with Ziggler already a punching bag as you say, then this feud was just one in many that ended with Ziggler losing, so it is ultimately going to do nothing for him.

Yep. It's almost like it's hard to make up for years of losing and having him go over Cena hasn't helped him much. You know, other than all those other reasons I gave you already.

As for having the title at WM. It is the WCW title that WWE pretty much treats as a second rate title for the most part. So if has it then so what? He faces an Orton or a Sheamus or an ADR.

You mean rather than having Sheamus vs. Orton which they're clearly building towards? Instead of that we should have Ziggler vs. Sheamus, as in a match that happend TEN TIMES last year on TV and PPV alone with Ziggler going 0-10? THAT'S what you want headlining Mania? Or Orton who he faced six times on PPV? Ziggler has no business being in that spot other than because he won a stupid case that they have no idea what to do with.

Ziggler did win at TLC but the follow up was piss poor. Even the Observer agrees with that.

And if Dave Meltzer says it you KNOW it's true. Give me a break.

The crowd at the PPV was also heavily behind Ziggler, so he is over in many places and has a lot of potential.

Yes, the smarkiest of smark towns cheered Ziggler. If that's what you're basing this on, you're a bigger schmuck than I thought.

Not all heels have to be cowards. The beauty is in the chase. Some play the cowardly role to perfection and there are bad-ass heels throughout history. I just postulated that I would like a strongly booked heel besides Punk. You don't like that, so they have to be a face.

No, actually when heels win clean, they usually become faces. If they don't cheat, what makes them heels? See also: CM Punk.

The funny thing is: I am not that big of a fan of Ziggler. He is fun to watch, nothing more. But you keep mentioning that I am bashing Cena as you go after Ziggler and say Ziggler beating Cena or getting booked strongly would be stupid as the fans know about all the past losses. But Vince and others here believe that wins and losses don't matter. So if wins don't matter and the WWE banks on the fans not knowing that then why would booking Ziggler strong be considered stupid? Wrestling fans are supposed to have short term memory only. What is stupid booking is having Cena no sell everything and win all the time. No one in WWE is a threat to him. They have to bring in outside guys such as the Rock.

Translation: I hate Cena, I don't want to say I hate Cena because it makes me look bad, and Vince said something and I'm going to go with it because it's easier than thinking for myself.

Ziggler is booked strong. Cena is booked stronger because he should be. That's what this whole thing boils down to.

I am not sure what crowd you are listening to, but they seem to be heavily pro-Ziggler when he faces Cena. But it seems that you see things through a different pro-Cena lens and that is fine. And the matches are competitive? No the last two weeks were not. I think you need to get your eyes and ears checked.

I see things through a Pro-Cena lens because he's the best in the world and one of the biggest draws of all time. the fact that you honestly think Cena was squashing Ziggler the last two weeks proves that you really aren't that intelligent.

 

[dukes07]

Gah learn how to quote stuff.



Because the MITB case is believed to be an easy way to get people to forget everything that happened before, which doesn't work.



He's a triple crown winner that beat Cena at the last PPV. That's pretty freaking strong.



Check.



Check.



Nope, which is why he got one already.



It would hurt Ziggler though, as it would be wasted coming into Mania season.


Yep. It's almost like it's hard to make up for years of losing and having him go over Cena hasn't helped him much. You know, other than all those other reasons I gave you already.



You mean rather than having Sheamus vs. Orton which they're clearly building towards? Instead of that we should have Ziggler vs. Sheamus, as in a match that happend TEN TIMES last year on TV and PPV alone with Ziggler going 0-10? THAT'S what you want headlining Mania? Or Orton who he faced six times on PPV? Ziggler has no business being in that spot other than because he won a stupid case that they have no idea what to do with.



And if Dave Meltzer says it you KNOW it's true. Give me a break.



Yes, the smarkiest of smark towns cheered Ziggler. If that's what you're basing this on, you're a bigger schmuck than I thought.



No, actually when heels win clean, they usually become faces. If they don't cheat, what makes them heels? See also: CM Punk.


Translation: I hate Cena, I don't want to say I hate Cena because it makes me look bad, and Vince said something and I'm going to go with it because it's easier than thinking for myself.

Ziggler is booked strong. Cena is booked stronger because he should be. That's what this whole thing boils down to.



I see things through a Pro-Cena lens because he's the best in the world and one of the biggest draws of all time. the fact that you honestly think Cena was squashing Ziggler the last two weeks proves that you really aren't that intelligent.

I have said over and over that I dislike Cena. I used Meltzer as an example that not everyone agrees with your opinion. Because I don't, now I am somehow less intelligent. Jesus, get off your fucking high horse. Though I will say that I have no idea how to break down quotes....So mayhap I am not very intelligent.

Hmmm, kind of funny that when I watched their cage match I heard the crowd explode when Ziggler nearly climbed out.

It makes you a schmuck because you cannot possibly fathom that there is someone out there who does not like Cena. You invalidate my opinion because I am anti-Cena. But somehow your pro-Cena opinion is fucking gospel. Jesus Christ, that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Essentially if Cena raped a nun you would be a character witness by saying the nun was not over with the six year old pro-Cena crowd.

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

Sweet Jesus.

 

[klunderbunker]

I have said over and over that I dislike Cena. I used Meltzer as an example that not everyone agrees with your opinion. Because I don't, now I am somehow less intelligent. Jesus, get off your fucking high horse. Though I will say that I have no idea how to break down quotes....So mayhap I am not very intelligent.

Hmmm, kind of funny that when I watched their cage match I heard the crowd explode when Ziggler nearly climbed out.

It makes you a schmuck because you cannot possibly fathom that there is someone out there who does not like Cena. You invalidate my opinion because I am anti-Cena. But somehow your pro-Cena opinion is fucking gospel. Jesus Christ, that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Essentially if Cena raped a nun you would be a character witness by saying the nun was not over with the six year old pro-Cena crowd.

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

Sweet Jesus.

1. I am indeed more intelligent than you. Trust me.

2. This

To say that Cena is the best in the world makes everything you said void. You have to be trolling at this point, or really ignorant. Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor? Was Lincoln really a tyrant? Was the Holocaust a myth perpetrated by the Elders of the Protocols of Zion?

sums up the whole thing better than anything else I can say.

3. If John Cena raped a nun, I can guarantee it would draw a bigger crowd than whatever Ziggler was doing that day.

To keep this on topic, the point of this thread was to say that Cena needs to be beaten to put someone over. That's already happened, but apparently that isn't enough for some standards. Now they want Cena to be pinned clean, which isn't going to make Ziggler a bigger star, because he's pretty much established as what he is now. The solution allegedly is to make him world champion, which won't happen anytime soon.

At the end of the day, what it boils down to is Ziggler simply isn't as good as he's made out to be. He's incredibly athletic, but at the end of the day he doesn't have what it takes to be a top guy. If he did, don't you think they would have pulled the trigger on him by now? A single win over someone doesn't change much anymore, even if it's the biggest star in the world like John Cena. You know, the guy that is so far and away bigger than anyone else in WWE that they had to bring in Brock Lesnar and the Rock to give him a challenge.

 

[dukes07]

1. I am indeed more intelligent than you. Trust me.

2. This



sums up the whole thing better than anything else I can say.

3. If John Cena raped a nun, I can guarantee it would draw a bigger crowd than whatever Ziggler was doing that day.

To keep this on topic, the point of this thread was to say that Cena needs to be beaten to put someone over. That's already happened, but apparently that isn't enough for some standards. Now they want Cena to be pinned clean, which isn't going to make Ziggler a bigger star, because he's pretty much established as what he is now. The solution allegedly is to make him world champion, which won't happen anytime soon.

At the end of the day, what it boils down to is Ziggler simply isn't as good as he's made out to be. He's incredibly athletic, but at the end of the day he doesn't have what it takes to be a top guy. If he did, don't you think they would have pulled the trigger on him by now? A single win over someone doesn't change much anymore, even if it's the biggest star in the world like John Cena. You know, the guy that is so far and away bigger than anyone else in WWE that they had to bring in Brock Lesnar and the Rock to give him a challenge.

You are not going to whip out your dick and try to compare size now are you?

I mean we could discuss the merits of Hellenistic influence on the Middle East or the historical arc pertaining to Russia's mistrust of the West while schizophrenically looking towards it for affirmation. But I am not intelligent. I mean I have seen the pro-Cena crowd in person. They are typically in elementary school or they have missing teeth, probably from Meth, and drive Trans-Am's with pictures of Tawney Kitaen on the dash. They usually bring their own White Lightening to the arena and for some reason tell others that the sure have a purdy mouth. Ned Beatty must get scared whenever Cena is in town.

Anyway, I will say that it has been really interesting. Enjoy watching the same shit over and over with the same predictable outcomes. Enjoy watching other wrestlers make Cena look halfway decent in the ring. Just drink the Fla-Vor-Aid like they did in Jonestown. Enjoy the poop and pee jokes and the same I have to take a shit look on his face. I mean they would keep him champ if they weren't worried about what few adults still watch WWE from fleeing. So I guess their confidence must not be high if they know that it would be difficult to get the over nine crowd into the arena. Good times. Meanwhile, I will watch cheer for guys who actually know how to wrestle and don't get shoved up our asses without the courtesy of reacharound.