On the subject of making a coherent argument
My inclination is typically to support anyone affording Brockwinkle the respect he deserves, but this is pathetic.
Let's get one thing out of the way immediately:
You see this...?
So basically this is one big ********** over the Garden Gnome and turning him into Cena 2.0?
Just because the IWC gets massive woodies over the Gnome doesn't count for squat.
Indy fab spot-monkeys don't have the long-term credibility with the casuals and they never will.
Hart has more in common with Lou Thesz than he does with the Garden Gnome - Interjection: Hart has absolutely nothing in common with Lou Thesz
Bryan is a spot monkey who happens to have a submission finisher.
Because the proliferation of threads fapping over the Garden Gnome are starting to get irritating.....especially when they're made by one note jokes (irony) like yourself.
That right there is not even an argument. It's a subjective statement repeated over and over again in a passive aggressive manner in lieu of actually making a point. As a rhetorical device, it displays intellectual parity with those who complain about Super Cena only knowing five moves.
Next; you are every bit as IWC as everyone else in this thread. You stumbled ammusingly close to the truth when you remarked about the IWC's desperation to pretend it doesn't exist - but then proceeded to do exactly the same thing yourself. The whole
"everyone else is a typical IWC smark but I'm a unique and special snowflake" routine ran out of gas here about four years ago. You're acting snotty and superior, arguing about why a wrestler is good/bad on the internet; you are the prototypical IWC member. Being able to remember a non-dementia ridden Verne Gagne does not change that.
Thirdly, you repeatedly tie yourself in knots when trying to define what factors matter when defining the overness of a wrestler. You dismiss the reactions of the live crowd off hand since it is disproportionately pro Bryan (although you make no effort to explain how you arrived at this conclusion) but fail to take into account that live gates account for nearly a quarter of the WWE's total revenue; and massively outperform merchandise sales (which you apparently do value - probably because you don't know what you're talking about) as a source of profit for the company. It's also the revenue stream that the WWE has had the hardest time maintaining post Monday Night Wars - so yeah, there's probably quite a lot of value in promoting a talent who resonates with the demographic most likely to hand over money for a live event.
Now leaving aside your tautological "he's shit because he's shit" rambling, what is there to have against DB? I don't watch the product, so I have no opinion on him one way or another, except to say that the hipster beard isn't cool or interesting.
However; He's unambiguously and indisputably the most over talent on the roster with the live audience. He's generation Y's clear favourite; Generation Y being estimated by WWE cooperate to constitute 20% of the product's total audience, as well as being one of the demographics most attractive to advertisers. His domestic and international success and popularity, both with and prior to the WWE, strongly suggests that he's at least a proficient worker, and need I remind you that he recently had the arguably the most successful PPV in professional wrestling history built around him?
When your entire counter to this is that he's shitty because he's an Garden Gnome Spot Monkey or whatever, it becomes pretty hard to take you seriously.
