SmackDown Live 8-1-17: John Cena VS Shinsuke Nakamura

[d_henderson1810]

Fans question a dream match on television. What a time to be alive.

It's a fight we don't have to pay for. Neither men are going to be less for wear if they lose. If Nakamura loses, it was to Cena, the face of pro wrestling. If Cena loses, it's to Nakamura, someone the crowd reveres. There really isn't a negative here. Sure, it could and most likely will end with a screwy finish, but that's wrestling and we got to see it for free. WWE is handing us ice cream and some of y'all would rather watch it melt instead of eating it.

Yeah, because paying $9.99 for the Network is so much more costly than getting the match free.

Maybe when WWE did PPVs and charged $50-60, then a "free" match like this would be a big deal, but when you can pay $10 a month, then it isn't as much of a stretch.

Also, there are plenty of negatives:-

-Cena winning will bring about the "SuperCena" chants, the "Nakamura buried" chants, and Nakamura takes a loss on free TV.

-Nakamura winning hurts WWE's bottom line, since there is less interest in a Nakamura v Mahal main event, then Cena v Mahal. I mean, we are already getting a dud SD Women's Match between Naomi and Natalya, which is underwhelming, so to then have someone who has been on SD for two months fight someone who has gone from "zero to hero" in three months on the company's second biggest show of the year won't get the interest that Cena v Mahal has.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Yeah, because paying $9.99 for the Network is so much more costly than getting the match free.

Maybe when WWE did PPVs and charged $50-60, then a "free" match like this would be a big deal, but when you can pay $10 a month, then it isn't as much of a stretch.

Well for me a monthly PPV is still a PPV and that mentality on not giving way PPV caliber matches on free TV still holds true regardless if it's 9.99 or 49.99.

The Network may have changed a few things but the old school mentality in programming matches and stories should not.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

At first, this looked like a "Summerslam" style feud- the franchise player, John Cena, versus the current WWE Champion, Jinder Mahal.

I knew it would be Cena who would come out when Mahal made an open challenge.

All was fine and good until Daniel Bryan came out.

Firstly, why would Daniel screw over Cena (which he did by making him fight Nakamura)? I mean, Bryan and Cena are almost relatives. Bryan's wife will be Cena's sister-in-law in a few months, and yet Daniel Bryan makes Cena have to "earn" it? Reverse nepotism at work. This would have worked better if Shane made the announcement, since he has no affiliation to Cena (and his speech to Owens earlier, about "putting on the best matches on Smackdown", would have been shown by booking Cena v Nakamura next week).

I see problems with doing this match. If Cena wins, then people here will say "Super Cena buried Shinsuke Nakamura" and "Nakamura should got back to NXT, because the main roster don't know how to use him" etc.

If Nakamura wins, then we have an underwhelming Summerslam main event- Nakamura v Mahal. Don't forget, having Jinder Mahal as champion is even a stretch, to then add Nakamura, who has been on "Smackdown" for six weeks, to compete for the title at the second biggest WWE show of the year, is a bit hard to swallow. Maybe on a "Smackdown" PPV, but not a major show, especially not one like "Summerslam".

I am not a fan of anyone getting a WWE Title or Universal Title shot in their first year on the main roster. I think they need to establish themselves first, show their wares. That is why I like MITB. You can "endorse" a future up-and-comer as a future WWE Champion, without having to pull the trigger straight away.

I like to see new talent win the secondary title first, like the IC or U.S. belt, see how they carry themselves as champion, and down the track, then pull the trigger if appropriate. If Nakamura is a true superstar, then he will still be a superstar a couple of years down the track, when he is "ready". He can barely speak English, so wouldn't be good cutting promos.

It should have been Cena v Mahal at "Summerslam", with no complications. Maybe have Cena earn it against Rusev (who was his opponent at "Battleground").

Doing Cena v Nakamura to earn a Summerslam title shot could end in tears if not done right. Nakamura winning will make the fans happy, but having Cena v Mahal at "Summerslam" sells more seats.

The only way to do this match, without anyone looking bad, is to have Baron Corbin interfere, and get Nakamura counted out or disqualified. This way, Cena can still fight Mahal, and Nakamura takes a loss, without losing momentum, because he was "screwed" out of the victory, and could also lead to another match between Nakamura versus Corbin at "Summerslam". This is the only way to do this match, and not upset either the fans, Nakamura's push, or the WWE's bottom line.

From a strictly kayfabe perspective, I wish this was something more on screen authority figures did. I know that kayfabe is essentially dead in terms of what's "real" and what isn't, but there are continuity issues in which kayfabe can still maintain some influence. We've seen quite often, whether it's WWE, GFW/TNA/Impact, ROH, etc. in which the wrestlers come out make a speech and flat out state what their matches are going to be. We often see heels saying something like "I'm not going to defend my title tonight" only for the babyface authority figure to "screw" said wrestler over to the delight of fans by saying he/she will indeed defend his/her title tonight.

In John Cena's case, again from a kayfabe position, I like that he's going to have to "earn" his shot. If you're going to have on screen authority figures, then have them be authority figures even to people like John Cena.

Mahal vs. Cena would have appeal to some and for some others it won't just as the same would go for Mahal vs. Nakamura. Cena vs. Nakamura is going to happen and I'm fine with it if Nakamura goes over. If Cena goes over, I'm fine with it as long as Nakamura isn't made to look like a chump. If there's some sort of interference that splits the match into a no contest, I'm fine as long as we get a good match with both guys looking good in it. There are a lot of positives in this in my eyes and this match being on TV rather than a ppv isn't a negative.

 

[Dagger Dias]

I ended up really enjoying the match. I can see where those who think it should have been saved for PPV are coming from. Part of me felt that way too. At the end of the day we're fans of the product and the vast majority of us, as in 99.9% of us, are nothing more than than just fans. WWE gave us a PPV quality match on Smackdown instead of at Battleground or Summerslam. That's ok. Raw and Smackdown need big matches too as others have pointed out. If it was nothing but jobber squashes for the entire 2 hours then Smackdown would suck. Nakamura winning was a nice surprise, though I would have been fine with either result. Definitely one of the best matches on Smackdown television this year so far.