The WWE's grimmest mistakes. #1 The Ryback Days.

[AegonTargaryen]

CM Punk turned heel effectively on the 1000th episode on Raw, which was also the same episode where John Cena became the privileged first person to ever cash in the MITB and not win the title. What went on in later weeks was a much more confrontational CM Punk, antagonizing the likes of Jerry Lawler and calling WHC Sheamus a weak second-best champion at best.

Big Show and John Cena had their own story and IMO it made for a lousy triple threat story leading into Summerslam '12 with big show's constant face-heel turns and no credence or credibility at all. Essentially, they needed a freshness to the stale John Cena-CM Punk feud from Summerslam 2011. Big Show became that freshness, with a dose of staleness.

Heelish tactics and some tainted victories later, CM Punk was supposed to face John Cena at HIAC, which would've gone down as one of the most amazing HIACs, and one final cuminating point for the storied rivalry between John Cena and CM Punk, not altogether different and smaller than the storied John Cena and Edge rivalry. In the handful of really good rivalries containing good matches John Cena has had, one could only enlist Edge, Batista, Randy Orton, and CM Punk. But the HIAC needed to happen. And it didn't happen.

Enter Ryback. Feed me more. CM Punk was supposed to say, "Feed you more? This is a WWE ring, not KFC you big gluttonous son of a bit-- ". Lame Ryback entrances, his rigidly moving robot-like body, his deltoids moving and legs stomping while stalking his opponent, Ryback was the weakest and most unbelievable repetition of Goldberg, if there ever was such a thing. It's unarguable that HIAC was a disappointment. Earlier Hell in a Cell used to be the devil's playground where Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels and HHH alike wrestled the Undertaker for a good 30 minutes. Now HIAC became a rookie's playground with FEED ME MORE chants, ending disappointingly in 11 minutes and 22 seconds.

Some say the triple threat encounter with Cena and Ryback was a "solid" match, but how good of a story was it? How engrossed were you? How many believed Ryback was the next big thing? Enter Shield. No CM Punk at TLC. This was practically a disastrous 4 months for the WWE, and technically, the entire latter half of 2012 with the same old John Cena and an untalented wrestler with an even more gruesome chant trying to lead the WWE into the next era. IMO, this was one of the WWE's grimmest mistakes, which occur year after year and they only get worse.

So what should've the WWE done instead? The obvious plan B. Not haste, but a proven commodity. Randy Orton. Randy Orton had been a boring babyface WHC and then a floating smackdown superstar since 2011. He did not really have a very successful first half of 2012. And when the WWE knew John Cena couldn't compete, they should've brought back Randy in the spotlight to face CM Punk and rekindle and continue their rivalry from 2011. However this time, CM Punk was the established big name, and Randy was an ineffectual and unmotivated superstar that needed to be kindled. This was the right time. CM Punk and Randy Orton could've saved what was otherwise a chain of flop WWE ppvs from HIAC-TLC. Heck, how obvious it is that a babyface team of Randy Orton would face a heel team of CM Punk in the traditional Survivor Series match? Brock Lesnar and Kurt Angle's rivalry from 2003 was built around the same story. The WWE championship and endless envy.

Instead of the disastrous Team Dolph "Really?" Ziggler vs Team Mick "Papa bear" Foley, we would've gotten a solid story and a solid match with Randy Orton and CM Punk. Of course Orton would've lost to Punk in HIAC because it was unjust to give Orton two consecutive victories over Punk in 2011. Why? Because CM Punk deserved better, and Orton had already been given too much time and time again. 2012 was the year of Punk. Not the WWE's time to experiment with Frankenstein. If only Vince Mcmahon knew...

How would I have booked it, since I'm so much smarter than the WWE?

HIAC- CM Punk beats Randy Orton, and Shield interferes on Punk's behalf.
Survivor Series-Randy Orton, John Cena, Ryback and Team Hell No beat CM Punk, Wade Barrett and The Shield in a classic 5-on-5 elimination match.
TLC-Triple threat TLC match. John Cena vs CM Punk vs Randy Orton. (Shield interferes and costs them the match).

This gives a more organic development to the later Randy Orton and John Cena recruiting fellows to feud with the Shield story.


Your thoughts?

 

[CM-Punkha]

I didn't mind Ryback in HIAC. It actually made it interesting. Leading up to the match, CSR And other wrestling pundits were all debating who should win. It was streak vs. legacy. They went with legacy and I am ok with that, streak was never that important but at that time it felt important.

I think the whole mistake was actually the Ryback heel turn. You take your number 2 baby face, who is still new and barely over and turn him into a heel to feed him to Cena. Why couldn't they do face vs face rivalry? Make it seem like Ryback and Cena had unfinished business from SS. Say what you want to say about Ryback wrestling but the fans WERE connecting with him. They chanted his chants. Bought his shirts and popped when he clotheslined someone. After that, he lost all the momentum he built despite his earlier loss to Punk (he should have beat Henry at WM too).

We have seen less talented wrestlers thrusted into the limelight. You don't have to be the perfect wrestler to be in the main event. Benoit couldn't talk. Nash never put on a 5-star match. But all these guys connected with the crowd and elicited some reaction. Ryback for whatever it was worth was doing that as a baby face (Which is harder to do btw). IMO, WWE missed a good opportunity to have a star by now.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

I didn't mind Ryback in HIAC. It actually made it interesting. Leading up to the match, CSR And other wrestling pundits were all debating who should win. It was streak vs. legacy. They went with legacy and I am ok with that, streak was never that important but at that time it felt important.

I think the whole mistake was actually the Ryback heel turn. You take your number 2 baby face, who is still new and barely over and turn him into a heel to feed him to Cena. Why couldn't they do face vs face rivalry? Make it seem like Ryback and Cena had unfinished business from SS. Say what you want to say about Ryback wrestling but the fans WERE connecting with him. They chanted his chants. Bought his shirts and popped when he clotheslined someone. After that, he lost all the momentum he built despite his earlier loss to Punk (he should have beat Henry at WM too).

We have seen less talented wrestlers thrusted into the limelight. You don't have to be the perfect wrestler to be in the main event. Benoit couldn't talk. Nash never put on a 5-star match. But all these guys connected with the crowd and elicited some reaction. Ryback for whatever it was worth was doing that as a baby face (Which is harder to do btw). IMO, WWE missed a good opportunity to have a star by now.

I'm not claiming Ryback should've never been elevated or anything. I'm not even criticizing his limited in-ring skills, at least from what we've seen in his past which is basically him beating two local jobbers with a few moves, and pinfall. All I said was that Ryback being pushed so early, and abruptly as that was the wrong choice, and the only choice at that time was Randy Orton because of his history with Punk, because he was the no 2 babyface behind John Cena, and also because he wasn't doing much ever since dropping the WHC to Mark Henry , i.e his feud with Wade Barrett on SD, him not participating in EC 2012, his 2-month feud with Kane, then the 2-month absence due to the Wellness policy violation. IMO, They should've utilized Randy Orton and essentially revitalized his failing/lacklustre career, which they eventually did in August 2013.

Also, if they only had to make Ryback lose because of interference by The Shield, they should've had Randy Orton be the victim because Randy was at that time a much more credible and menacing threat to swear that he's going to "end the Shield" and have a series of matches with them until Wrestlemania. Meanwhile, Ryback could've always been featured, not been the centre, but featured. There was nothing more obnoxious than watching "Feed me more" and Ryback entering as a leader, and a far more superior wrestler and superstar like Randy Orton being a damn participant. Here's this big guy who was beating 2 jobbers, and he's not even a damn novelty like how Goldberg was in 1998, and suddenly he's the limelight because John Cena is injured. That did more harm to Ryback than anything, and the rest is history. Now people don't even want Ryback to be involved as Rybaxel in the WM XXX match because they'd much rather have Goldust and Cody Rhodes, Luke Harper and Rowan.

Believe me, I want to like Ryback, or I wanted to, despite the idiotic Feed me more thing, but now the only thing that comes to mind immediately when the word Ryback or a pic of Ryback is perceived is, Boring/Don't want/OH PLEASE NO. And I admit I might be a little biased but it cannot be denied that Ryback was one of the big "flops" along with Sin Cara, Tensai, Fandango, and Brodus Clay. One could add Batista to that list, but in my earnest opinion, Batista has effectively become a jerkfaced selfish heel and he's superbly amusing to listen to and the segments with him and Randy are the most hilarious in recent memory. And Batista is much better in the ring.

 

[JJV]

True. Honestly 2012 had a lot of missed opportunities. Kane should have gone over Cena at Royal Rumble and they didn't need a rematch at Elimination Chamber. Kane could have been used better in the first half, but instead he had a terrible feud with Orton (who IMO should have gone over Kane at WM and should have lost to him at Extreme Rules) and then had to face Zack Ryder at the Over the Limit kickoff! Cena could have been a part of the elimination chamber match and Chris Jericho could have won the Rumble so Cena can replace him at the chamber. Brock should have gone over Cena at Extreme Rules. I've said this before in another thread, they should have really made Cena have a bad year after losing to Rock, then the whole rematch between the two at WM 29 would have been more intriguing. Cena didn't have such a bad year and there was no need for a rematch in the first place, which is what hurt the rematch.

Now I know Orton was suspended at the time, but he did return before Summerslam. So instead of punishing him and booking a rematch between ADR and Sheamus (one of the worst feuds ever; matches weren't that bad tho. But the problem is without a good storyline, no matter how good the match is, you just wouldn't be that into it). They could have either had a triple threat between Orton, Sheamus and ADR, or they could have had Orton vs Cena vs Punk. IMO, I would have had Orton, Sheamus and ADR go at it at Summerslam and I would have booked Orton vs Punk vs Cena for Survivor Series. These three could have had a great feud. Orton had history with Punk.
I really wanted to see the feud between Cena and Punk end at Hell in a Cell, but since Cena got injured, Orton was the best option for a replacement (Punk has never beaten Orton in PPV). They could have had a great Hell in a Cell match. After Survivor Series, Orton and Punk got injured. The rest of the stories could have been as it is, because these guys got injured so there really is nothing you can do about it.
But honestly, WWE could have done a lot more than what they did in 2012.

Coming to Ryback, this guy was just not interesting. Honestly, I've no idea why WWE pushed him. At least if he was given some time to build up, he could have improved or something. He should have had a run in the mid card for a while. He was given too much too soon, and he wasn't even a great superstar. I don't know why guys like Morrison never got to main event while guys like Ryback got to. Punk's heel turn was awesome, but everything after that was not good. The build up to NOC was awesome, so was the match...but Punk should have won with a roll up or something. I don't like it when major matches at PPV end in draws and no contests. I don't think anybody does. They didn't use Punk's heel turn well and Ryback was one of the worst choices to feud with Punk!

 

[AegonTargaryen]

True. Honestly 2012 had a lot of missed opportunities. Kane should have gone over Cena at Royal Rumble and they didn't need a rematch at Elimination Chamber. Kane could have been used better in the first half, but instead he had a terrible feud with Orton (who IMO should have gone over Kane at WM and should have lost to him at Extreme Rules) and then had to face Zack Ryder at the Over the Limit kickoff! Cena could have been a part of the elimination chamber match and Chris Jericho could have won the Rumble so Cena can replace him at the chamber. Brock should have gone over Cena at Extreme Rules. I've said this before in another thread, they should have really made Cena have a bad year after losing to Rock, then the whole rematch between the two at WM 29 would have been more intriguing. Cena didn't have such a bad year and there was no need for a rematch in the first place, which is what hurt the rematch.

I didn't think of as far back as early 2012 but yeah, it wouldn't have hurt John Cena to lose to Kane at the Royal Rumble, and also Orton should've won at WM, and Kane at Extreme Rules in a Last man standing match to reestablish
Kane as a dominant monster. As far as the WWE making Cena win over Brock, I will never be able to fathom, Why?. Brock needed the win. He was the only credible opponent besides The Rock to beat Cena clean. But they didn't.

Now I know Orton was suspended at the time, but he did return before Summerslam. So instead of punishing him and booking a rematch between ADR and Sheamus (one of the worst feuds ever; matches weren't that bad tho. But the problem is without a good storyline, no matter how good the match is, you just wouldn't be that into it). They could have either had a triple threat between Orton, Sheamus and ADR, or they could have had Orton vs Cena vs Punk. IMO, I would have had Orton, Sheamus and ADR go at it at Summerslam and I would have booked Orton vs Punk vs Cena for Survivor Series. These three could have had a great feud. Orton had history with Punk.
I really wanted to see the feud between Cena and Punk end at Hell in a Cell, but since Cena got injured, Orton was the best option for a replacement (Punk has never beaten Orton in PPV). They could have had a great Hell in a Cell match. After Survivor Series, Orton and Punk got injured. The rest of the stories could have been as it is, because these guys got injured so there really is nothing you can do about it.
But honestly, WWE could have done a lot more than what they did in 2012.

I don't think Orton needed to be in the Del Rio-Sheamus feud or even get back on a quest for regaining the WHC. IMO, if the WWE were so willing to give two Punk-Cena triple-threat matches, then surely Randy Orton vs CM Punk vs John Cena would've been a match for the ages , and not with lousy wrestlers like the Big Show or Ryback. If not at Summerslam, certainly TLC was the right time for this triple threat match. I wouldn't have minded 2 triple threats, a normal one at Summerslam, and TLC triple threat at TLC.

Coming to Ryback, this guy was just not interesting. Honestly, I've no idea why WWE pushed him. At least if he was given some time to build up, he could have improved or something. He should have had a run in the mid card for a while. He was given too much too soon, and he wasn't even a great superstar. I don't know why guys like Morrison never got to main event while guys like Ryback got to. Punk's heel turn was awesome, but everything after that was not good. The build up to NOC was awesome, so was the match...but Punk should have won with a roll up or something. I don't like it when major matches at PPV end in draws and no contests. I don't think anybody does. They didn't use Punk's heel turn well and Ryback was one of the worst choices to feud with Punk!

I can't disagree with a single bit. I do think that they should've allowed Punk much more in his heel turn than say that he deserves respect and then have his match with Cena to be a Draw. And Ryback needed a lot more time to be pushed to the main-event. If it were a normal ppv and a normal main event title match, it would've been still alright. But Ryback suddenly facing CM Punk at HIAC was a stupid decision. Again, Orton was the only logical choice because of their history, and no other superstar could step up, not Sheamus, not Alberto Del Rio, not Wade Barrett.

 

[A11oftheLights]

It is all well an easy to sit here now with Ryback bombing out since turning heel, losing to henry, etc. and say how shite he has been. But leading up to the HIAC PPV Ryback was rolling and as you said the WWE needed something fresh and tried but at the same time the best thing they had going was Punk's reign (the second was Ryback, til the Shield got on a roll) which was restoring some much needed credibility to the title

 

[JJV]

But Ryback suddenly facing CM Punk at HIAC was a stupid decision. Again, Orton was the only logical choice because of their history, and no other superstar could step up, not Sheamus, not Alberto Del Rio, not Wade Barrett.

F*ck yeah! Hell in a Cell is supposed to be a match where feuds end, or at least the two guys who are in it should have history! Ryback and CM Punk in a Hell in a Cell was a terrible choice.
True. Orton was the right choice. But I must say, ADR and Punk also had history. He's the one Punk defeated to win the championship. Having him turn face was still a better choice than Ryback vs CM Punk. He did turn face by the end of the year anyway. But yes, Orton was the best choice.

Even last year, having Ryback be the new Paul Heyman guy was a bad call. Punk's feud with Heyman was supposed to be one of the best ever, and it was...but only till Summerslam. After that, well...Curtis Axel and Ryback were his opponents.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

It is all well an easy to sit here now with Ryback bombing out since turning heel, losing to henry, etc. and say how shite he has been. But leading up to the HIAC PPV Ryback was rolling and as you said the WWE needed something fresh and tried but at the same time the best thing they had going was Punk's reign (the second was Ryback, til the Shield got on a roll) which was restoring some much needed credibility to the title

I am not sitting here and shitting on Ryback because it's an established fact now that Ryback was a flop. I do assert that Randy Orton was the best possible choice for Punk to face at HIAC, as a substitute for Cena, or even in a way to Rekindle the Punk-Orton feud which had not really gotten boring or repetitive like many other feuds have.

The feed me more chants and Ryback's undefeated streak is all fine. What I'm saying is that it'd have been a bigger thing if he went on being an undefeated wrestler who faced and defeated the likes of Big Show and Mark Henry, may be held the IC/US title and then finally stepping up to face the WWE champion. With HIAC few weeks away, the WWE shouldn't have made Ryback step up instead of utilizing the no 2. babyface Randy Orton who himself had been quite cold ever since his return from the 2 month suspension. I am not even going to criticize the Ryback matches with Punk, including HIAC and the triple threat, because I've never seen them, nor ever will.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

F*ck yeah! Hell in a Cell is supposed to be a match where feuds end, or at least the two guys who are in it should have history! Ryback and CM Punk in a Hell in a Cell was a terrible choice.
True. Orton was the right choice. But I must say, ADR and Punk also had history. He's the one Punk defeated to win the championship. Having him turn face was still a better choice than Ryback vs CM Punk. He did turn face by the end of the year anyway. But yes, Orton was the best choice.

Even last year, having Ryback be the new Paul Heyman guy was a bad call. Punk's feud with Heyman was supposed to be one of the best ever, and it was...but only till Summerslam. After that, well...Curtis Axel and Ryback were his opponents.

Yeah. A very bad year for CM Punk in my estimation, especially the decision for him to drop the title just like that to the Rock, not being involved with Rock and Cena, and then the disappointing feud with Paul Heyman-Ryback-Curtis Axel. It's almost like they deliberately did things wrong with CM Punk in 2013. I believe some alright things happened too, such as his match with Chris Jericho at Payback, his match with Brock Lesnar, and his match with The Undertaker.

 

[Reflection]

Ryback was immensely over among the fans. The people that had a problem with him were mainly smarky people from the internet. But they have a problem with everything, so their opinions don't matter as much. At first, I didn't like it, and there was a point where four guys in the roster had undefeated streaks going simultaneously, but gradually I started liking his role. He was an actual powerhouse with the believable ability to decimate his opponent, and not just any other big guy like say, Tensai or Brodus. And the fans bought it too. During the lead-up to his match against Punk, logically we knew that he would lose, but we also knew that he was gonna kick Punk's ass. He shouldn't have been put into the title picture with Punk in the first place. But that didn't hurt his character as much as that momentum-ruining S.O.B. John Cena did. Then he lost to Mark Henry too. Again, unnecessary. He went from a winning streak to a kind of losing streak, until he was reduced to the Ryback that we have now.

 

[avi01]

WWE made a lot of mistakes with him. He was thrown way too quickly into the title match with Punk and it is a good thing he did not win. That did not hurt him. He was over but his limits were already quite obvious, there was not much depth to Ryback. But he could still be a monster. Except that he gets defeated a lot. They had a chance to redeem that at wrestlemania but Henry beats him. Poor booking. The next night, he turns heel. Then they gave him the mic, and he was bad at that. Some of his promo while feuding with Cena were embarrassing. Add to that, Cena had no problem pointing it out on live TV. He went from monster to laughing stock.

His defeat streak continued and they eventually tried another push. To fix his promo problem, they have him with Heyman, which is huge for him. He still did not impress and creative did not help at all. He faces CM Punk for 2 straight PPVS, gets defeated in both matches. Booking 101 would have him actually win at least one of them. So in the end, this does not help him, does not help Heyman and is a complete wastage of CM Punk. So overall, lack of talent and very bad creative ruined Ryback. They could not have handle it any worst, they had something that day he came out to help Vince.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

WWE made a lot of mistakes with him. He was thrown way too quickly into the title match with Punk and it is a good thing he did not win. That did not hurt him. He was over but his limits were already quite obvious, there was not much depth to Ryback. But he could still be a monster. Except that he gets defeated a lot. They had a chance to redeem that at wrestlemania but Henry beats him. Poor booking. The next night, he turns heel. Then they gave him the mic, and he was bad at that. Some of his promo while feuding with Cena were embarrassing. Add to that, Cena had no problem pointing it out on live TV. He went from monster to laughing stock.

His defeat streak continued and they eventually tried another push. To fix his promo problem, they have him with Heyman, which is huge for him. He still did not impress and creative did not help at all. He faces CM Punk for 2 straight PPVS, gets defeated in both matches. Booking 101 would have him actually win at least one of them. So in the end, this does not help him, does not help Heyman and is a complete wastage of CM Punk. So overall, lack of talent and very bad creative ruined Ryback. They could not have handle it any worst, they had something that day he came out to help Vince.

Nice synopsis of the Ryback saga, and I agree with every point as far as bad booking is concerned. But do you agree Randy Orton would've been a more logical and the only choice to replace Cena for HIAC against Punk , and carry the feud until TLC? If not, whom else do you think could be a replacement for Cena?

 

[avi01]

Nice synopsis of the Ryback saga, and I agree with every point as far as bad booking is concerned. But do you agree Randy Orton would've been a more logical and the only choice to replace Cena for HIAC against Punk , and carry the feud until TLC? If not, whom else do you think could be a replacement for Cena?

Since throwing Ryback in the match basically meant they were trapped in a corner, it would have been smarter to have Orton there, yes. Orton could have used that push too. He was the only logical other choice to be fair. But I insist that they could still have benefited a lot from having Ryback in that feud..they screwed it up later. I have more problem with how they handled things later than actually having Punk vs. Ryback.

 

[Mongoose McQueen]

The WWE definitely screwed the pooch with Ryback. The problem is that at WrestleMania for some odd reason which I still can't understand, they had Mark Henry go over Ryback at WrestleMania 29. This was a dumb move considering that Ryback was being fed to The Shield on a weekly basis at this point, always losing and being bad positions. Unfortunately, Ryback was in a bad place because right after losing to CM Punk at Hell in a cell, he was then used as a tool to help get The Shield over thus ending the end of his reign of dominance in WWE.

It's really kind of sad because here's a guy who had all the tools to be successful but like many in WWE, fell victim to god awful booking decisions made by Vincent K. McMahon. He was VERY over with the crowd, and had the size to be a really big deal. They made so many dumb mistakes with Ryback and turning him heel accomplished nothing for him except bury him further into the ground, it did him no favors. He then proceeded to lose twice in a row to WWE's franchise player John Cena which made matters much worse. Followed by a pretty bad run in the mid card, and then proceeded to be dropped down the card further and further until the point that no one will ever care about him again.

 

[bioshock]

lol what a bunch of crap from the OP. Everyone been crying over Orton in the main event now, and your saying Orton should of been in the main event then for 4 months instead of Ryback? Actually I think more people complain because Ryback never did win the belt when he was the hottest thing going at the time, well before Bryan became so popular, or the Shield got popular.

Some time in wrestling the point is to push the future, and build up new stars, Punk vs Orton, Punk vs Orton vs Cena does no favors for anyone. Just like Orton vs Batista at Wrestlemania does no favors for the future of WWE. Its why most think Bryan needs to be in, because its his time to join the elite.

OP basically you wanted the top 3 guys in the main event year around, and this is why guys like your actually aren't smarter than those running WWE, least they know enough to take a chance on pushing someone to the moon failure or not.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

lol what a bunch of crap from the OP. Everyone been crying over Orton in the main event now, and your saying Orton should of been in the main event then for 4 months instead of Ryback? Actually I think more people complain because Ryback never did win the belt when he was the hottest thing going at the time, well before Bryan became so popular, or the Shield got popular.

Yeah it was so great seeing Ryback pushed to the moon out of nowhere, followed by a papa bear-like Mick Foley having a Team Foley vs Team Ziggler match, followed by a disastrous triple threat match between Punk, Cena and Ryback right? CM Punk and Randy Orton feuding had an organic vitality, a history and would've given us a logical Survivor Series match, because Cena was injured. Who's claiming Ryback shouldn't have been pushed? You're totally wrong in people complaining about Ryback not winning the title from Punk. What they're complaining about is how Ryback's career was killed by his losses to Cena, his heel turn, and the further burial.

Some time in wrestling the point is to push the future, and build up new stars, Punk vs Orton, Punk vs Orton vs Cena does no favors for anyone. Just like Orton vs Batista at Wrestlemania does no favors for the future of WWE. Its why most think Bryan needs to be in, because its his time to join the elite.

In time, every wrestler who deserves it will be pushed. Roman Reigns will be. Cesaro will be. What would you rather have, John Cena vs Randy Orton vs CM Punk , or John Cena vs Ryback vs CM Punk? What'd have been a greater encounter to further a feud, HIAC with Punk and Orton, or HIAC with a non-established entity like Ryback? The thing is, some of you IWC members want your favourite heroes pushed to the moon without them having earned it first. It took Chris Benoit 18 years to get to the main event. Randy Orton, Edge, Chris Jericho and pretty much any great WWE/WHC first became the IC champion, and then went on for the big title . And here is Ryback, with his feed me more chants, and suddenly he's supposed to be winning the WWE championship from Punk? Greater debacle than The Miz .

OP basically you wanted the top 3 guys in the main event year around, and this is why guys like your actually aren't smarter than those running WWE, least they know enough to take a chance on pushing someone to the moon failure or not.

I did not say I wanted Randy Orton and John Cena to chase CM Punk and end his historic WWE championship reign. I said Randy Orton was a better choice to replace an injured Cena, at least for a big event/match like HIAC. It shouldn't be hard to believe that Randy Orton was a far more superior performer than Ryback ever will be, and certainly a proven commodity. Once again, Randy Orton-CM Punk progression to end 2012 would've had a far greater impact than trying to reinvent the Big Show, or take an unproven star who's not Brock Lesnar, and put him in HIAC. Heck, Even Brock Lesnar destroyed Hulk Hogan and several others before we were supposed to take him as a credible threat to defeat The Rock. By the time Brock faced The Undertaker at Unforgiven, he had become the embodiment and personification of the current big thing and no longer a rookie boy from the farms of South Dakota. You couldn't say The Undertaker had a chance of beating that young beast.

 

[Judah's Lion]

Ryback was immensely over among the fans. At first, I didn't like it, and there was a point where four guys in the roster had undefeated streaks going simultaneously, but gradually I started liking his role. He was an actual powerhouse with the believable ability to decimate his opponent, and not just any other big guy like say, Tensai or Brodus. And the fans bought it too. He went from a winning streak to a kind of losing streak, until he was reduced to the Ryback that we have now.

Smark Madden is dead on here. i condensed his response a bit, but i wanted to touch on these points specifically.

no matter what anybody says, nobody can deny that he was OVER with the fans. like major over. i had the pleasure of seeing him live and he got the second loudest pop of the night, behind only the Rock. no lie. he was over and he got over gradually, organically. he flat out worked.

he was believable in his character. other undefeated streaks have meant little to nothing when they only last a few weeks or months cuz they always end disappointingly, but Ryback was different. his streak mattered to the point that it actually became his character. he was an undefeated streak.

this is just from memory, but if i remember correctly, Ryback went from being undefeated to losing at the following pay per views in consecutive order:

Hell in a Cell
Survivor Series
TLC
Royal Rumble
Elimination Chamber
WrestleMania
Extreme Rules

there's one more in there that i'm forgetting, another loss to Cena. maybe Over the Limit or something like that?

either way, Ryback went from being a very OVER, UNDEFEATED FACE, to being a very indifferent (as viewed by the fans), can't-win-to-save-his-life heel. not his fault. it's just the way he was written. WWE made a lot of mistakes with Ryback. these might just be considered the big 3.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Yeah it was so great seeing Ryback pushed to the moon out of nowhere, followed by a papa bear-like Mick Foley having a Team Foley vs Team Ziggler match, followed by a disastrous triple threat match between Punk, Cena and Ryback right? CM Punk and Randy Orton feuding had an organic vitality, a history and would've given us a logical Survivor Series match, because Cena was injured. Who's claiming Ryback shouldn't have been pushed? You're totally wrong in people complaining about Ryback not winning the title from Punk. What they're complaining about is how Ryback's career was killed by his losses to Cena, his heel turn, and the further burial.

Actually, I quite recall quite a few people complaining about Ryback not winning the title. Within a month or so of his push, there were people starting threads complaining that Ryback hadn't won the championship. I was glad they didn't rush to slap the title onto him because at that time, in my opinion, he wasn't ready. There's also the allegations, not saying they're true though, about Ryback's attitude backstage. Allegedly, management felt he had some areas that needed work and were hoping he'd improve in those areas. For instance, there were reports of wrestlers complaining that Ryback was reckless and dangerous in the ring at times. Again, I dunno if it's true, but that's what was out there. There are also a lot of reports, both from dirtsheet writers and fans, that Ryback would act like a dick when it came to fan meet & greets or promoting the show. Allegedly, Ryback didn't care much for interacting with fans, behaved in ways that reflected this and didn't like speaking to the media to hype the product. Now IF all that's true, then Ryback's push deserved to be killed. In any job, if your boss tells you that you need to work on improving some things in your game, then you do it if you want that raise or promotion. If you don't, you get fired or other guys get those opportunities instead. IF Ryback acted like a dick to fans or didn't want to do some PR stuff to help promote the brand, then why would he keep getting pushed?

In time, every wrestler who deserves it will be pushed. Roman Reigns will be. Cesaro will be. What would you rather have, John Cena vs Randy Orton vs CM Punk , or John Cena vs Ryback vs CM Punk? What'd have been a greater encounter to further a feud, HIAC with Punk and Orton, or HIAC with a non-established entity like Ryback? The thing is, some of you IWC members want your favourite heroes pushed to the moon without them having earned it first. It took Chris Benoit 18 years to get to the main event. Randy Orton, Edge, Chris Jericho and pretty much any great WWE/WHC first became the IC champion, and then went on for the big title . And here is Ryback, with his feed me more chants, and suddenly he's supposed to be winning the WWE championship from Punk? Greater debacle than The Miz.

Yeah, not really. There are ALWAYS gonna be wrestlers who may deserve a push who don't get it, for various reasons. Sometimes the reasons are legit, sometimes they may be outright bullshit, sometimes a little of both. Maybe he has a lot of ability but acts like a dick or is causing trouble backstage. Maybe he tries really hard and works well, but simply doesn't draw. Maybe he has all the tools, but they already have guys in place that're drawing well and they wanna keep things as they are. It's hardly ever as 100% simple as to whether or not a guy has the stuff. A couple cases in point are Curt Hennig and Ted DiBiase. Hennig had a good look, was killer in the ring, could work a strong match with almost anyone, could talk well on the mic, etc. DiBiase was the top heel of the late 80s, could be damn good on the mic, very solid in the ring and continuously generated heat. Arguably, these two MIGHT be the best in the history of the company to have never been WWE Champion. Sure, they had title matches here and there, but they never held the strap. When it comes to who "deserves" to be pushed, I have trouble finding anything particularly lacking in either one of them.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

Actually, I quite recall quite a few people complaining about Ryback not winning the title. Within a month or so of his push, there were people starting threads complaining that Ryback hadn't won the championship. I was glad they didn't rush to slap the title onto him because at that time, in my opinion, he wasn't ready. There's also the allegations, not saying they're true though, about Ryback's attitude backstage. Allegedly, management felt he had some areas that needed work and were hoping he'd improve in those areas. For instance, there were reports of wrestlers complaining that Ryback was reckless and dangerous in the ring at times. Again, I dunno if it's true, but that's what was out there. There are also a lot of reports, both from dirtsheet writers and fans, that Ryback would act like a dick when it came to fan meet & greets or promoting the show. Allegedly, Ryback didn't care much for interacting with fans, behaved in ways that reflected this and didn't like speaking to the media to hype the product. Now IF all that's true, then Ryback's push deserved to be killed. In any job, if your boss tells you that you need to work on improving some things in your game, then you do it if you want that raise or promotion. If you don't, you get fired or other guys get those opportunities instead. IF Ryback acted like a dick to fans or didn't want to do some PR stuff to help promote the brand, then why would he keep getting pushed?

I did not put Ryback's backstage and PR issues into perspective but yeah I've got to agree with you. But the most essential thing in is to be over and consistently deliver and that'd get you ahead. Lets take the example of the Miz. Here's a guy who was as generic as it gets. Catchphrases like "Really" and "I'm awesome", not built, and couldn't wrestle much(at least in those days, I'm not sure how athletic he really is after incorporating Ric Flair's figure four) and he complied when it came to PR and stuff, but at the end of the day, he was no Randy Orton/Cena when it came to consistent in-ring performance. We all know what happened to the Miz's career. It's a wonder what would've happened had they at any point chosen to given Ryback the title.

Yeah, not really. There are ALWAYS gonna be wrestlers who may deserve a push who don't get it, for various reasons. Sometimes the reasons are legit, sometimes they may be outright bullshit, sometimes a little of both. Maybe he has a lot of ability but acts like a dick or is causing trouble backstage. Maybe he tries really hard and works well, but simply doesn't draw. Maybe he has all the tools, but they already have guys in place that're drawing well and they wanna keep things as they are. It's hardly ever as 100% simple as to whether or not a guy has the stuff. A couple cases in point are Curt Hennig and Ted DiBiase. Hennig had a good look, was killer in the ring, could work a strong match with almost anyone, could talk well on the mic, etc. DiBiase was the top heel of the late 80s, could be damn good on the mic, very solid in the ring and continuously generated heat. Arguably, these two MIGHT be the best in the history of the company to have never been WWE Champion. Sure, they had title matches here and there, but they never held the strap. When it comes to who "deserves" to be pushed, I have trouble finding anything particularly lacking in either one of them.

Agreed. Mr Perfect Curt Hennig was one of the very few multi-talented individuals and was stuck with the IC title in the WWF. But you've got to know the competition during those days was far too much. Within the same decade of the 90s, you saw Yokozuna, Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Roddy Piper, Kevin Nash, Scott Hall and the subsequent rise of Bret Hart, followed by the rise of Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, Mick Foley, The Rock, AND HHH. All of that notwithstanding the non-WWF championship guys like Undertaker and Jake the Snake. Plus you had WCW with it's own dozens of stars headed by Ric Flair and Sting. That meant not every joe despite how much talent he had could win the WWF title or be a mainstay. If I'm also not mistaken, during a large chunk of the '90s, the WWF championship would change hands after a long period, much unlike how it was from 1998. Those factors prevented several wrestlers to ever win the title, including Curt Hennig and Ted Debiase.

It was still competitive and tough in the 2000s but ever since WCW's collapse and WWE 's monopoly, the number of big stars that exists now, as compared to the 90s have almost diminished quadruply. Why else would you rely on stars created in the ruthless aggression era and the attitude era and bring them to sell ppvs? Case in point- Brock Lesnar, Batista, and of course The Rock though his sole purpose in returning was a once-in-a-lifetime feud with Cena. Thus, it's more than ever easier to win a world title now, because The Miz did it. Wonder what someone's reaction to the thought of Miz being the WWF champion in the Stone Cold era would be.

 

[whoopin' ass]

Problem is they screwed up Ryback almost right from the start but most people didn't realize it. Look at Brock's debut back in the day - came in against somewhat established talent, dominated them, won the title quickly. Now look at Ryback - beats local jobber #1, repeat for weeks, start beating 2 jobbers that no one has ever heard of, repeat for weeks ... No one bought him as a serious threat to Punk because wwe gave us no reason to - who had he beaten that mattered? TNA did a similar thing with EC3 but they were smart, they made it a bit of a joke - here is the nephew of the owner trying to be a wrestler but picking weaker opponents who he can easily beat. By the time he got to real competition, you wanted to see him take on the top talent and get beat because he was acting like he belonged there. With Ryback, you didn't care because he was just beating jobbers but there was nothing behind it - he wasn't arrogant like EC3, he just said nothing. Now all if a sudden he is going to step up and take on Punk?

Had they gotten rid of the jobbers earlier and had him beat real talent - not talking Ryder and Santino for weeks - the angle might have worked better as you could say he was eating through the talent but the way the did it, he was never going to get over properly.

 

[MMA Mark]

Ryback should have gone over Henry at Wrestlemania and never turned heel.

Since hindsight is 20/20, in retrospect I would have kept the WHC title on a heel Big Show and had Ryback win the Rumble. He could have faced Henry at Elimination Chamber instead and then took the belt off of Show at Mania with a massive Shell Shocked. Instead of him doing it in a random match on RAW, then having Show kick out and KO him anyways, it could have been a cool Wrestlemania Moment.

Big Show could have injured Ryback the next night and still done the Ziggler cash-in. Ziggler vs Ryback vs Show at Extreme Rules. Ziggler wouldn`t have been concussed by Swagger in this alternate universe and could have had a solid feud with Ryback for the title in the following months.

 

[Cats Pajamas]

Ryback had only done squash matches up until Hell in a Cell, but even so he was waaaay over with the fans. When Cena became injured, WWE had already been building tension between Ryback and Punk and at the same time Orton was several weeks into a feud with ADR. Because Cena's injury occured so close to the PPV the only replacement that could have made any sense was Ryback... They didn't have enough time to put someone else in there.

Actually, I applaud them for striking while the iron was hot and capitalizing on Ryback's reactions. How long would his momentum have lasted during the Road to Mania? Once we hit January the focus was going to immediately shift to the Rock anyway, and why shouldn't it? I remember there was a ton of hype going into Hell in a Cell, with a lot of wrestling's esteemed "experts" claiming the WWE "had booked themselves into a corner!" It was a lot of fun to read; I even almost decided to watch this PPV live, a practice I abandoned several years earlier.

However, I think WWE did miss a great feud in Punk/Orton. Punk's character had the propensity to drag backstage ugliness into on screen storylines, and just months prior Orton had returned from a 60-Day suspension for his second wellness violation. It's possibly a little too easy to write that feud, but it could've gotten personal/interesting.

 

[kadroan]

CM Punk turned heel effectively on the 1000th episode on Raw, which was also the same episode where John Cena became the privileged first person to ever cash in the MITB and not win the title. What went on in later weeks was a much more confrontational CM Punk, antagonizing the likes of Jerry Lawler and calling WHC Sheamus a weak second-best champion at best.

Big Show and John Cena had their own story and IMO it made for a lousy triple threat story leading into Summerslam '12 with big show's constant face-heel turns and no credence or credibility at all. Essentially, they needed a freshness to the stale John Cena-CM Punk feud from Summerslam 2011. Big Show became that freshness, with a dose of staleness.

Heelish tactics and some tainted victories later, CM Punk was supposed to face John Cena at HIAC, which would've gone down as one of the most amazing HIACs, and one final cuminating point for the storied rivalry between John Cena and CM Punk, not altogether different and smaller than the storied John Cena and Edge rivalry. In the handful of really good rivalries containing good matches John Cena has had, one could only enlist Edge, Batista, Randy Orton, and CM Punk. But the HIAC needed to happen. And it didn't happen.

Enter Ryback. Feed me more. CM Punk was supposed to say, "Feed you more? This is a WWE ring, not KFC you big gluttonous son of a bit-- ". Lame Ryback entrances, his rigidly moving robot-like body, his deltoids moving and legs stomping while stalking his opponent, Ryback was the weakest and most unbelievable repetition of Goldberg, if there ever was such a thing. It's unarguable that HIAC was a disappointment. Earlier Hell in a Cell used to be the devil's playground where Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels and HHH alike wrestled the Undertaker for a good 30 minutes. Now HIAC became a rookie's playground with FEED ME MORE chants, ending disappointingly in 11 minutes and 22 seconds.

Some say the triple threat encounter with Cena and Ryback was a "solid" match, but how good of a story was it? How engrossed were you? How many believed Ryback was the next big thing? Enter Shield. No CM Punk at TLC. This was practically a disastrous 4 months for the WWE, and technically, the entire latter half of 2012 with the same old John Cena and an untalented wrestler with an even more gruesome chant trying to lead the WWE into the next era. IMO, this was one of the WWE's grimmest mistakes, which occur year after year and they only get worse.

So what should've the WWE done instead? The obvious plan B. Not haste, but a proven commodity. Randy Orton. Randy Orton had been a boring babyface WHC and then a floating smackdown superstar since 2011. He did not really have a very successful first half of 2012. And when the WWE knew John Cena couldn't compete, they should've brought back Randy in the spotlight to face CM Punk and rekindle and continue their rivalry from 2011. However this time, CM Punk was the established big name, and Randy was an ineffectual and unmotivated superstar that needed to be kindled. This was the right time. CM Punk and Randy Orton could've saved what was otherwise a chain of flop WWE ppvs from HIAC-TLC. Heck, how obvious it is that a babyface team of Randy Orton would face a heel team of CM Punk in the traditional Survivor Series match? Brock Lesnar and Kurt Angle's rivalry from 2003 was built around the same story. The WWE championship and endless envy.

Instead of the disastrous Team Dolph "Really?" Ziggler vs Team Mick "Papa bear" Foley, we would've gotten a solid story and a solid match with Randy Orton and CM Punk. Of course Orton would've lost to Punk in HIAC because it was unjust to give Orton two consecutive victories over Punk in 2011. Why? Because CM Punk deserved better, and Orton had already been given too much time and time again. 2012 was the year of Punk. Not the WWE's time to experiment with Frankenstein. If only Vince Mcmahon knew...

How would I have booked it, since I'm so much smarter than the WWE?

HIAC- CM Punk beats Randy Orton, and Shield interferes on Punk's behalf.
Survivor Series-Randy Orton, John Cena, Ryback and Team Hell No beat CM Punk, Wade Barrett and The Shield in a classic 5-on-5 elimination match.
TLC-Triple threat TLC match. John Cena vs CM Punk vs Randy Orton. (Shield interferes and costs them the match).

This gives a more organic development to the later Randy Orton and John Cena recruiting fellows to feud with the Shield story.


Your thoughts?

I love your idea of using Randy Orton. He wasn't doing anything at all during that fall besides having pointless matches with Dolph and Del Rio at PPV's and beating Cesaro and Barrett multiple times on RAW.

I agree, Randy should have replaced Ryback in the storyline. I still think WWE would have went with a triple threat as the main event of Survior Series, Orton vs. Cena vs. Punk would have been a bigger sell. Since Punk was hurt at TLC, I guess Orton could take Ryback's spot in that TLC match against The Shield.

As far as Ryback, I think they really dropped the ball on him in October. I really like how they had him teasing a feud with The Miz. Miz was the IC Champion at the time. Seeing him as IC Champion for the greater part of the year instead of seeing Kofi/Barrett/Miz play hot potato with the title for the the winter would have been great.

Fans could have warmed up to Ryback as a main eventer as he have a credible reign as IC champ

 

[AegonTargaryen]

Ryback had only done squash matches up until Hell in a Cell, but even so he was waaaay over with the fans. When Cena became injured, WWE had already been building tension between Ryback and Punk and at the same time Orton was several weeks into a feud with ADR. Because Cena's injury occured so close to the PPV the only replacement that could have made any sense was Ryback... They didn't have enough time to put someone else in there.

That's the crux of the situation. He hadn't ever defeated, well not beyond Camacho or Hunico anyway, any established names but mostly local jobbers
and WWE jobbers. It's far too easy for the bored audience with limited attention span to revel in a trance-inducing primeval session of chants where the chant itself loses its meaning. Whether it be "YES" or "Feed me more", the audience didn't know better. By virtue of conditioning, it was too easy for them to respond appropriately to Ryback's every gesture or elicitation. Getting over in the true sense is not a transitory "over" but a CM Punk over. Here was this guy, not imposing, I did not even know him in 2006 when I watched the first episode of ECW and yet I heard people chanting CM Punk. That's over. Survivor Series 2006, people aren't cheering for DX and Hardys, the two biggest fan-favourite teams ever, but they're chanting CM Punk, CM Punk, CM Punk. That's over. However , I'll admit that it was one of the great "moments" (insofar as Ryback had any weight in the eyes of the audience and backstage) when he confronted Punk backstage with his silent stare.

Actually, I applaud them for striking while the iron was hot and capitalizing on Ryback's reactions. How long would his momentum have lasted during the Road to Mania? Once we hit January the focus was going to immediately shift to the Rock anyway, and why shouldn't it? I remember there was a ton of hype going into Hell in a Cell, with a lot of wrestling's esteemed "experts" claiming the WWE "had booked themselves into a corner!" It was a lot of fun to read; I even almost decided to watch this PPV live, a practice I abandoned several years earlier.

In this case, it was not striking the iron while it was hot, but moulding the iron too fast and until you know the iron was twisted and bent and wrought to imperfection. Imagine Batista already winning the title by New Year's Revolution because he was "hot" at then. We would never have anticipated slowly his journey from the RR victory till the wrestlemania moment where he finally beat the game, even though I never liked the match. In Ryback's case, because of him never having beaten many mid-carders or having had at least a few good feuds, him being thrown away so early was actually a mistake, especially when the WWE had other choices. It'd have been another thing for them to keep Ryback confronting Punk and leading to an eventual combat between them, and that certainly would've had a bigger payback, especially considering it was obvious they were going to have The Shield be the debutants screwing Punk's opponent out of the WWE title. Had they used this approach, perhaps Ryback would've beaten either of Mark Henry or Big Show at Survivor Series, and surely would've been a huge fan favourite in 2013

However, I think WWE did miss a great feud in Punk/Orton. Punk's character had the propensity to drag backstage ugliness into on screen storylines, and just months prior Orton had returned from a 60-Day suspension for his second wellness violation. It's possibly a little too easy to write that feud, but it could've gotten personal/interesting.

That was the perfect time for the WWE to recarve and recreate a mad, vicious, psychotic and enraged "viper", may be with a few twists, and not because of some MITB contract giving him an excusatory win over DB. He would've appeared much more intense and better than ever, had they already chosen to go the Randy Route, notwithstanding the title would've had to be with Punk so he could drop it to the Rock.

 

[Cats Pajamas]

Ohhhh, I get it... it's like a fantasy booking thing, right? Then I agree, Orton/Punk would've been fun and much better for Orton. Also, the actual match at HIAC had a pretty lame finish, so I agree Punk/Orton woulda probably been a lot better quality for those that shelled out the 60 simoleans. That's a feather in your cap. Your Survivor Series and TLC ideas sounded alright, too.

It's far too easy for the bored audience with limited attention span to revel in a trance-inducing primeval session of chants where the chant itself loses its meaning. Whether it be "YES" or "Feed me more", the audience didn't know better. By virtue of conditioning, it was too easy for them to respond appropriately to Ryback's every gesture or elicitation. Getting over in the true sense is not a transitory "over" but a CM Punk over.

The point I'll make for Ryback is that he will probably never be that over again, know what I mean? Even if everyone who chanted for him was a caveman, they were still chanting for him at the time and I was too. Regardless of why he was getting a reaction, the reaction was there and God only knows how much longer that was going to last. If there was ever a chance to make money on Ryback, it was then.

So personally, I liked the way they did HIAC because I enjoyed the two weeks of ultra-hype on WrestleZone with none of the buyer's remorse.