By your standards sure, but you're not everyone. Then again neither am I, making this irrelevant, moving on.
Anybody with a set of ears would tell you the same thing, but yeah -- let's move on.
Ryback was nothing more than the hot tag or occasional powerhouse in any of those three tag matches. TLC was never about Ryback it was about the Shield itself, what else did Ryback do in that match then throw Rollins through tables? EC Cena was the focus of the Shield's attack's until of course Ryback got the hot tag only to be pinned not through shenanigans but pure strategy that the faces can't keep up with. That's literally the entire thing the angle is pushing, it's not about Ryback himself it's about how Shield is a better team than any three superstars. Ryback might not be hiding but he's no shining through and it's not helping him the long run. And I wouldn't call all of those major matches either, all have been overshadowed by what Cena, Rock, or Punk is doing.
Okay, so he's the fourth biggest star in the WWE, behind three dudes who are going to be remembered as some of the greatest ever. I don't see what's wrong with that. Listen, there's nothing wrong with being the powerhouse or hot tag either -- that's a pretty huge role, actually. The crowd goes apeshit when Ryback starts tearing people a new one -- lesser wrestlers have made a career of that. The Shield angle, for my money, is the second hottest thing in the WWE, begin Rock/Cena. And when Ryback was working with Punk and Cena, he was right at the top of the food chain. Sheamus hasn't been there in quite some time, and even if it was a very quick walk in the park for Ryback, they clearly trusted him enough to put him in that position.
Moves do mean something which is why I don't think you're understanding why it's silly to have Ryback in a tournament when he's had nothing but squashes, a average HIAC and TLC matches he's lost, and the rest be six man tags he hasn't been successful in either. The Cesaro thing is exactly what I'm talking about, Ryback has beaten him (only once to my recollection too, others have been countouts) and he still continues to look stronger and dominant than Ryback has in months.
No, man -- they don't. Seriously, Hogan is the greatest wrestler ever and he has less moves than Ryback. It doesn't matter. Do one move well, and you can still make a living off of it -- it's not about the moves. Moves are secondary to being able to execute well. It doesn't matter that all his matches are squashes either -- Goldberg made it into this thing and most of his matches -- throughout his whole career -- never made it past being squashes.
Seriously though, his Cesaro argument will get you nowhere. He doesn't look more dominant than Ryback, especially when he loses to him in under two minutes, clean in the center of the ring. Saying Cesaro looks better than Ryback is just hyperbole, man.
Way to prove my point of people clinging to the legends. Nowhere does it say you have to be around X amount of years and have X amount of title reigns to be in the tournament. As far as I'm concerned it's based off popularity in every given match. Last year there were plenty of match ups where people who weren't exactly on each other's level but still won based off the stipulation or popularity itself. Austin's already won, Hogan's, Flair's, Taker's, and etc. have plenty of people that will mindlessly support them throughout the tournament and I might even be one of them depending on who they're facing but I feel like Sheamus deserves to go far, just like you feel X superstar deserves to win the whole thing. I'm just defending my choice as I will when the tournament happens.
No, your whole career is taken into account. That means influence, popularity, kayfabe achievements and so on -- it clearly makes it harder for Sheamus and Ryback to make it into this, doesn't it? Yeah -- people are stupid, that's why the idea that Hulk Hogan can't climb a ladder still exists. If Andre The Giant faces Jeff Hardy in a TLC match, I'll take Andre. The stip doesn't matter, most of the time. If it's close, and one guy is considered an expert, then it may sway my opinion. Otherwise, the greater wrestler (in his prime) will always deserve to win.
So, basically, your whole argument just boils down to the fact that you don't want the most deserving guys to win, because they already have? What's the point of having this tournament then? Let's just hand it to the next guy in line every year, maybe even Barry Horowitz will get his chance to shine!
p.s. he was also skip sheffield and ryan reeves)
