Take off the rose colored glasses (US Title)

[Woodstuff]

Disliking the Cena US Open Challenge is a classic example of smarks being to 'smart' for wrestling. Of course Cena isn't going to lose the title on Raw. And of course he's going to defend the title week after week. If he lost the belt a few weeks after he won it, it wouldn't have really changed anything. Cena's whole gimmick is that he's John Cena, the unstoppable never give up workhorse.

When he does lose the title, it'll almost definetly be to someone coming up from NXT. And that person will instantly become THE name to beat in WWE. I can see Finn Balor or Samoa Joe being the guy to step up and win the Open Challenge.

But honestly, if this whole thing has been too predictable, then you really should just stop watching because it's never going to be good enough to catch you off guard. Or just stop reading dirtsheets, either would probably work.

 

[rmp0012002]

I dislike Cena but it's good to see the belt being defended and not hidden down the bottom of the card. The problem is that it still isn't a stepping stone to anything. It has the lineage of the U.S. Belt from Crockett but since the world champion is always there too the belt can't be elevated any higher. The same for the IC belt.

 

[Sundar]

As long as the belt is with Cena it will feel important but that's because of Cena's starpower and legacy. The moment he loses the belt, it will go back to being irrelevant. So in that sense, Cena hasn't elevated the title at all. Like the OP mentioned, most of his opponents never had a chance and Rollins pretty much buried the title on Raw, saying it meant nothing compared to the world title.

P.S. Why do people bitch and moan about Ambrose being a bad US champ? It's not his fault that he was hardly ever booked to defend his title. His involvement with the Shield at the time meant that he was involved mostly in tag matches rather than singles matches.

 

[whoopin' ass]

So are you saying there was zero percent chance in your mind that Owens could have or will take the title of Cena?

Also it's kind of interesting in your one post earlier about Cesaro not needing the exposure when there's a thread in the spam section where the OP believes the exact opposite.

That Cesaro is being wasted and hasn't been given a solid story.

What does it matter what Cena does when he loses the title? What matters is what they do with whoever beats him.

Owen Hart beat Bret Hart at Wrestlemania X. Bret went on to win the title same night. It didn't hurt Owen any way or make him less believable in his role. He still went on to win mid-card titles and tag titles and no one said "Well he beat Bret who won the world title the same night, so he's not believable as a mid-card champion anymore."

Maven pinned The Undertaker for the Hardcore title. Granted he had help from The Rock. But no one expected Maven to go on and win the world title just because he beat The Undertaker. And The Undertaker went on being The Undertaker.

There's no reason someone like Kevin Owens or Cesaro can't take the title off Cena and be fine regardless of what Cena does after.

But that's just it - with anyone else, I would agree with you 100% except we are talking Cena here. The rules are different for Cena. They didn't hold Bret up there as the unbeatable champ. When you watched his Mania match against Austin, you thought there was a chance Austin could win because Bret lost when it was important - he lost to Owen. Owen beating Bret started a whole new storyline for Owen but it only mattered because Bret lost big matches. That doesn't happen with Cena. Vince is so scared to lose merch sales that Cena is constantly booked strong. Yeah he lost a match to Owens, and then beat him twice in a row. In the meantime, Owens lost the NXT title. Did Owens really come out on top? That's the problem - if Cena didn't always come out on top, if his wins weren't written off and he didn't come back stronger the next night, this might have worked. Had it been Bryan or Ziggler, it would have been great as you could have seriously seen Owens or Cesaro beating them. The whole thing relies on you thinking the champ can lose but we don't think that with Cena. This is the guy who dominated the main event for the last decade. Think back - would anyone have believed Hogan would lose to HBK back in the early 90's? No way that was going to happen. Same here - Cena is treated differently and that special treatment means his angles are pretty much a waste because even in the odd chance he loses the US title, he will have the wwe title again within a few months so in the end, he come out ahead when no one else would. With Taker and Maven, that was Vince being Vince. No one takes it seriously and wwe pretty much ignores it now so it is meaningless.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Of course Cena isn't going to lose the title on Raw. And of course he's going to defend the title week after week......Cena's whole gimmick is that he's John Cena, the unstoppable never give up workhorse.

Correct. It was a radical enough departure from policy to have a main event talent drop down to carry a midcard title; having Cena lose the title on Raw to a midcard talent would be way too much, and wouldn't accomplish anything positive for the company.

Still, the purpose of this ambitious plan was to get us talking about the US title, which is something we certainly hadn't been doing before Cena won it. Now look at it...... although some in this thread are ridiculing some of the performers who came out to challenge Cena, I remember it being exciting and mysterious to see the likes of Sami Zayn and Kevin Owens out there, as well as enjoying the spectacle of Cesaro doing so very well against the new US champ. Cena was also helping to build interest in these guys as he defended his belt. Win-win.

The rose-colored glasses are still in fashion for this program, which has been exactly what WWE wanted it to be.