TNA Region, Nashville Subregion, First Round: (1) John Cena vs. (32) Earthquake

[enviousdominous]

Great. However, this is not the tournament designated for the greatest Sumo Wrestler ever. Tenta's career in sumo has absolutely nothing to do with this. You're resorting to comments about Tenta in Sumo and the ever idiotic "Cena sucks I'm sick of him" comments when all signs point to you being desperate to argue an argument you simply cannot win. Cena may have lost a portion of the fans, but you act like they all hate him. You might, but lots of people happen to be fans of him.

As I live and breath! The one and only Dagger Dias.

What makes a man worthy of putting on the tights and stepping into the ring with legends is definitely applicable when it comes to rating his potency as a performer. You don't just walk into a job interview for a top level position within a company unless you prove that you can seamlessly blend in with what they look for in an employee. To be booked in NJPW the way John Tenta was, his career in Sumo was his proof that he could hang.

I resorted to "Cena sucks I'm sick of him"? I'd be pretty embarrassed if that was an actual statement of mine, almost as much as I'd be if I set up the straw man claiming that as much was the argument of my opponent. Maybe you're just too deep in the Poe fallacy, who really knows with you.

I'm desperate to make an argument? I'm not grasping at straws and making redundant claims, you're doing that enough for everyone. I never said that everyone hates him, I'm clearly arguing with some pretty aggressive Cena marks here. I'm saying that you, and the other folks I'm juggling on here, wouldn't be the majority in a consensus of a TNA crowd. I'm saying that you, and the other folks I'm juggling on here, wouldn't even be the majority in a consensus of a WWE crowd.

The feeling is mutual.

Says the guy using the argument of Tenta being successful in Sumo to determine why he supposedly would defeat John Cena in any type of pro wrestling match.

I'm speaking of his accolades to remind those who aren't too clear on his work that got him into pro-wrestling, exactly why he deserves to be taken more seriously than just another Hogan opponent. Whether you're an undefeated Sumo competitor with a 21-0 record or you're a two time NCAA wrestling champion, it matters to the bookers if you could handle the pressure of legitimate competition and win.

Bookers aren't in the business of playing to the tune of popular opinion on an obscure internet pro-wrestling forum, they're in the business of making money. You make money if you book John Cena to lose Earthquake.

I do like Tenta's work. I'm a fan.

Oh, do go on.

However, I am also a John Cena fan, which disproves your ridiculous theory that the only fans who tolerate Cena are the ones tired of hating him. Go back to watching your WCW tapes. Cena's not going anywhere anytime soon whether that be in WWE or in this tournament. Tenta gets a few of his moves in before Cena locks in the STF and wins by submission. Everyone pays to see him lose? Tell that to all the people buying Cena merchandise.

I was referring to period of time when whether or not Punk would defeat John Cena was a reality, not a theory.

I wasn't referring to Cena's ability to sell merchandise. I don't rate the potency of performers on how well they can market themselves to children who don't know any better.

I never said that everyone pays to see him lose, enough people pay to see him lose to make a difference in how he should logically be booked. Please don't misrepresent my argument using blanket statements.

If you think that Cena would be suicide for TNA, then you've got problems.

If Dagger Dias has dagger diagnosed with dagger dementia, I must be doing something right.

Your hatred of Cena is blinding you from seeing the reality that not only does he go out there making his best effort to put on matches for fans, including those like you who hate him for no legitimate reason, but he is a draw and one of the biggest draws in the wrestling business today.

He is the biggest draw when he's booked to lose, numbers don't lie. I don't just jump on a performer's bandwagon just because they're a huge draw; if their abilities appeal to me, then I'll support them.

 

[enviousdominous]

You're a smarky IWC guy, that's fine.

You're an insulting generalization of what the average person would assume of a member of the IWC making an insulting generalization toward me as a member of the IWC.

I get you don't like Cena, I don't like him either.

I get that you get that, you're the one who argued with me. Remember?

What you are doing is borderline depressing, you are being willfully ignorant to Cena's mega-stardom in WWE just because "Tenta was a good sumo wrestler once." Tenta, with all of his ability as a sumo wrestler couldn't beat Hogan, there's just no way Earthquake can touch Cena?

I'm being willfully ignorant? See my response to your insult above. You're being willfully ignorant, your arguments are a prime example of the bare assertion fallacy and uses terms like "mega-stardom" to validate a love for John Cena and minimizes Earthquakes ability to sell a match on his being a Sumo wrestler once.

Oh by the way, quit trying to impress everyone with big words because the jokes on you, I can't read.

D'oh! Oh how silly of me. I don't like to use big words, or five dollar words as I call them. If I slip and use a word that goes over your head, that wasn't my intention. I'm not trying to argue by being overly pedantic in an effort to drown out any confidence that someone might have in their ability to debate me, I want to be debated. I chose not to use the term "ipse dixit" in the last paragraph because doing so wouldn't prove that I'm smart, it would prove that I don't want you to understand my point.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Normally, this would be the time that I insult Enviousdominous, but you know what? I'm in a pretty good mood, and I'm willing to open my mind up a bit, even if it's to the frayed ends of sanity.

Envious, why do you hate John Cena? People boo him because they're idiots thinking that they're smart and the IWC follow those founding principles because they're sheep. It's not Cena's fault that he's been booked to win a grand majority of the matches he's in, it's the nature of his character. If you look past the booking (which is MUCH better than it used to be), you'll find a guy with some sublime mic skills and a guy who can put on some excellent matches even to this day, just look at his matches with Cesaro and Harper. And don't you dare say the other guy carried Cena, or I'll stop defending you. Just tell me, in your own words, where your hatred of Cena stems from.

Earthquake was a tough enough competitor in his own right, but at the end of the day, his biggest success IN THE WRESTLING WORLD (when I'm arguing about Henry, I'm arguing from a kayfabe standpoint, I'm not bringing up loads of strongman competitions) was losing to Hulk Hogan at Summerslam 91, a time where Hogan was just starting to come out of his prime. A prime John Cena has very rarely lost to a big guy clean at PPV, where the matches matter the most. Not to bury John Tenta here, but he meant very little after that. He teamed with Typhoon, joined the Dungeon of Doom and became a lesser version of Rikishi. None of those spell any kind of victory for Tenta here.

Envious, stop making a fool out of yourself and vote Cena. I'm not saying that to be a dick, I'm saying that to help you here. You'll thank me later.

 

[enviousdominous]

Tenta was never the global face of a wrestling company. Cena is.

I'm not arguing that Cena is the global face of a wrestling company. I would want a caveat to that point to be that he's not global in the sense of competing in venues for different companies.

Earthquake may not have been the global face of pro-wrestling, but he could have been booked strong anywhere he went. Time has shown that Cena's days of being booked strong as a financially beneficial decision are done. Earthquake never outlasted his welcome and his presence deserves to be felt against a wider range of opponents.

Tenta has no chance, regardless of his legitimate sumo record. Taking into account an outside sports record is like saying LT would beat Cena because he was good at football. Down to brass tacks, John Cena is just a bigger star than Tenta could have ever hoped for. John Cena has made a legendary career by beating the best WWE has to offer today. Tenta- not so much.

I was only bringing up John Tenta's Sumo record to recognize his legitimacy as a favorite of the men who put him into pro-wrestling. It was an introduction to the point that Earthquake beating Cena makes sense because they'll be competing in a world where the fans look for more than what they're told to believe.

John Tenta hoped that his performances would make Hogan look better because the crowd demanded as much. The crowd would demand that John Cena lose this match.

John Cena has beaten the best that the WWE has to offer, that's part of why most crowds are eager to see him lose. John Cena is to pro-wrestling what Nickelback is to rock music. John Cena can wrestle, and he can be very memorable. It's the fact that his quick rise to the top wasn't built on anything genuine and that, in spite of wishing that they could, the majority of the fan-base isn't allowed to ignore him.

Real simple victory here as Cena makes his own earthquake by hitting the AA on Sharks McTubby.

Are you writing off the plausibility that John Cena could make a match with Earthquake more interesting?

Opponents of John Cena always have the burden of having to make him look like he's not so bad afterall. Earthquake was so good at putting Hogan over that Hogan himself demanded that WCW hire him. If anyone can make a Cena match into something interesting for a TNA crowd, it would be Earthquake.

 

[GI Cake]

You're an insulting generalization of what the average person would assume of a member of the IWC making an insulting generalization toward me as a member of the IWC.



I get that you get that, you're the one who argued with me. Remember?



I'm being willfully ignorant? See my response to your insult above. You're being willfully ignorant, your arguments are a prime example of the bare assertion fallacy and uses terms like "mega-stardom" to validate a love for John Cena and minimizes Earthquakes ability to sell a match on his being a Sumo wrestler once.



D'oh! Oh how silly of me. I don't like to use big words, or five dollar words as I call them. If I slip and use a word that goes over your head, that wasn't my intention. I'm not trying to argue by being overly pedantic in an effort to drown out any confidence that someone might have in their ability to debate me, I want to be debated. I chose not to use the term "ipse dixit" in the last paragraph because doing so wouldn't prove that I'm smart, it would prove that I don't want you to understand my point.

There really isn't much debate here. You're ignoring reality and objectivity because you made it very clear that you are not a fan of Cena.

 

[enviousdominous]

Normally, this would be the time that I insult Enviousdominous, but you know what? I'm in a pretty good mood, and I'm willing to open my mind up a bit, even if it's to the frayed ends of sanity.

Oh, I for one don't doubt that you'll be up to the challenge of having to piece together a conclusive thought that qualifies as a reasonable point.

Envious, why do you hate John Cena?

I'm not competing against John Cena in this tournament. Maybe next year I'll make my mark, but this year Earthquake won the right to take on John Cena. I'm not going to debate what you imagine is my baseless hatred for John Cena.

People boo him because they're idiots

Oh no shit?! You're willing to bridge the gap and be nice to me, but the booing crowd can go fuck themselves. I can only imagine how precise and axiomatic your explanation will be.

thinking that they're smart and the IWC follow those founding principles because they're sheep.

Whew. Mind blown.

You must think that you're very up on the founding principles of the IWC. You made a blanket statement as basis for making another blanket statement and validated both with yet another blanket statement. I'd debate the point you made, but I think even you deserve a second chance to clarify it.

It's not Cena's fault that he's been booked to win a grand majority of the matches he's in, it's the nature of his character.

Then by your logic he doesn't deserve credit for becoming popular enough to earn his spot at the top in the first place. He was arbitrarily booked that way!

If you look past the booking (which is MUCH better than it used to be), you'll find a guy with some sublime mic skills and a guy who can put on some excellent matches even to this day, just look at his matches with Cesaro and Harper.

But you've admitted that booking him to win is a redundant move that hurts buy-rates, thus making your point that his character is entertaining a moot one.

And don't you dare say the other guy carried Cena, or I'll stop defending you. Just tell me, in your own words, where your hatred of Cena stems from.

When did I say other guys carried Cena? You're threatening to turn on me regarding my potential for making a statement that I haven't made in this thread, calm down killer.

If we really want to get way off topic like one of our lovely moderators is trying to do, we can make this debate about me and John Cena. If it's alright with you, I'd rather stick to promoting Earthquake.

Earthquake was a tough enough competitor in his own right, but at the end of the day, his biggest success IN THE WRESTLING WORLD (when I'm arguing about Henry, I'm arguing from a kayfabe standpoint, I'm not bringing up loads of strongman competitions) was losing to Hulk Hogan at Summerslam 91, a time where Hogan was just starting to come out of his prime. A prime John Cena has very rarely lost to a big guy clean at PPV, where the matches matter the most. Not to bury John Tenta here, but he meant very little after that. He teamed with Typhoon, joined the Dungeon of Doom and became a lesser version of Rikishi. None of those spell any kind of victory for Tenta here.

Hulk Hogan was out of his prime? I think it's very difficult to pick a time when Hogan was at his prime, we as pro-wrestling fans let a lot of odd things appeal to us. He came to WCW and put them in a place higher than the WWE after his program with Earthquake.

A prime John Cena wouldn't very rarely lose to a big guy, he would never loses to a big guy. John Cena is out of his prime, he'll never be as over as he was back in 2005. John Cena today is looking to job to Bray Wyatt, and even if he wins he's still at a point in his career where he's not in the main event and he's taking on a solid mid-carder.

Envious, stop making a fool out of yourself and vote Cena. I'm not saying that to be a dick, I'm saying that to help you here. You'll thank me later.

You are saying that to be a dick, and whether or not I'm making a fool of myself is relative.

You think I can't stomach the embarrassment of voting for Earthquake against John Cena? I'm pretty sure my peers on and off this website will still be willing to hear me out occasionally. I can live with myself if I vote for Earthquake against John Cena, it wouldn't be the first time I've fought the majority on an issue.

 

[ocekit]

A prime John Cena wouldn't very rarely lose to a big guy, he would never loses to a big guy. John Cena is out of his prime, he'll never be as over as he was back in 2005.

I was going to point this out, but you seem to have done so for me. In WZT hypotheticals, we generally talk about what would happen if a guy in his prime took on another guy in his prime.

You've basically stated here that a prime John Cena would defeat a prime Earthquake.

I see John Cena showing Earthquake the utmost respect, allowing 'Quake to look strong. But this match ends with a ground-shaking Attitude Adjustment.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

We're really having a debate here? On whether or not John Cena, someone who's the face of the biggest wrestling company in the world would lose to a guy who wore a shark fin on his head?

Enviousdominous, I compare your arguments to trying to push a parked car. You're using a helluva lot of energy and accomplishing nothing. Cena will win this by a large margin and should.

This is coming from me - the same guy who tried to say Cena doesn't really like sick kids and only does Make-A-Wish because the WWE tells him to. I find Cena to be what's wrong with modern wrestling. That doesn't mean I'm oblivious to the fact he'd beat a guy who was used as fodder for main eventers.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Oh, I for one don't doubt that you'll be up to the challenge of having to piece together a conclusive thought that qualifies as a reasonable point.

So nobody in the Cena camp has any kind of reasonable point? That's some mighty ego issues you have.

I'm not competing against John Cena in this tournament. Maybe next year I'll make my mark, but this year Earthquake won the right to take on John Cena. I'm not going to debate what you imagine is my baseless hatred for John Cena.

Actually it will be of help of us so we can adjudicate whether your dislike of Cena is coming into play. So stop avoiding the question and answer it.

Oh no shit?! You're willing to bridge the gap and be nice to me, but the booing crowd can go fuck themselves. I can only imagine how precise and axiomatic your explanation will be.

But we aren't talking about any random person. We're talking about you and the fact that you're just as bad as them in this thread.

Whew. Mind blown.

You must think that you're very up on the founding principles of the IWC. You made a blanket statement as basis for making another blanket statement and validated both with yet another blanket statement. I'd debate the point you made, but I think even you deserve a second chance to clarify it.

People have been attacking Cena since 2005, which is older than the age of this forum. Hell, you probably weren't even born when he debuted.

Then by your logic he doesn't deserve credit for becoming popular enough to earn his spot at the top in the first place. He was arbitrarily booked that way!

So are you backing Lesnar in this tournament?

But you've admitted that booking him to win is a redundant move that hurts buy-rates, thus making your point that his character is entertaining a moot one.

No, I didn't. Cena rising above the monsters is refreshing for children. By that logic, I should get tired of Austin stunning Vince every week on Raw. Not to mention that I think it's your justification for hating Cena.

When did I say other guys carried Cena? You're threatening to turn on me regarding my potential for making a statement that I haven't made in this thread, calm down killer.

Special precautions need to be put into place to stop you doing anything cretinous.

If we really want to get way off topic like one of our lovely moderators is trying to do, we can make this debate about me and John Cena. If it's alright with you, I'd rather stick to promoting Earthquake.

And I don't think this is all at hand here. Kane is one of my favourite wrestlers, and I'd admit he'd lose to Hogan. Earthquake is a guy I think is alright, but he'd lose to Cena. Even as a fan of John Tenta, you need to be able to see that he has no chance here.

Hulk Hogan was out of his prime? I think it's very difficult to pick a time when Hogan was at his prime, we as pro-wrestling fans let a lot of odd things appeal to us. He came to WCW and put them in a place higher than the WWE after his program with Earthquake.

Before the NWO promo, Hogan lost a lot of stock in WCW. It wasn't so much a prime as it was a revitalization.

A prime John Cena wouldn't very rarely lose to a big guy, he would never loses to a big guy. John Cena is out of his prime, he'll never be as over as he was back in 2005. John Cena today is looking to job to Bray Wyatt, and even if he wins he's still at a point in his career where he's not in the main event and he's taking on a solid mid-carder.

Are you fucking kidding me? You're being subjective about Cena's prime now? Yeah, you're a cretin. Have fun getting annihilated in this debate.

Oh yeah, and Cena could still beat Earthquake today. Nice grammar too.

You are saying that to be a dick, and whether or not I'm making a fool of myself is relative.

I wasn't, I was trying to get you to vote the better wrestler and to stop the insults from coming so you can regain some credibility.

You think I can't stomach the embarrassment of voting for Earthquake against John Cena? I'm pretty sure my peers on and off this website will still be willing to hear me out occasionally. I can live with myself if I vote for Earthquake against John Cena, it wouldn't be the first time I've fought the majority on an issue.

We've tried hearing you out. Everything that comes out of your mouth is drivel, metaphorically and literally.

The saying "Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear, or a fool from any direction." applies quite nicely here.

 

[enviousdominous]

You asked for an explanation thus I gave you one. Makes sense to me.

You didn't provide an explanation in the first place, you just left it up to us to validate the assumption that John Cena would be logically booked to win a match in TNA. That doesn't make sense to me, and neither does the fact that you chose not to argue the actual point I made in the paragraph that quote is pulled from in your response.

Cena wouldn't have to say that. In fact Cena hardly ever calls himself the best. And saying that you know how the TNA crowd would react is crazy imo but since we are bringing it up. I think Cena would get a huge reaction.

But the overwhelming argument I seem to be getting is that John Cena is number one just because he is, and therefore TNA would accept him as the winner in this contest. Hogan is a guy who is rightfully booked as an icon of pro-wrestling, and even he was booed by the TNA crowd.

What I can do in predicting the reaction of the TNA crowd is use their past reactions to similarly booked individuals as an indicator, which is what I did. I think Cena would get a huge reaction too, on par with the reaction he received at One Night Stand.

In what world is John Tenta in the same category as Mick Foley or RVD? Please explain to me how their work and how they correlate without total bullshit. Tenta was never close to either of these guys.

You made the point that past WWE performers have jumped to TNA and have been well received, I was arguing that those particular performers were never exploited in the same way that John Cena was.

Mick Foley and RVD, both former WWE/WWF champions who won the crowd's heart, both transitional champions because the powers that be decided as much. John Tenta may have never won a world championship, it was a different time back then, but he won the crowd's heart.

I remember all of those classic Tenta promo's and all his great matches. I mean I was just thinking the other day. No, Cena's been involved in great promo's and great in ring action. Nothing Tenta ever did was equal to what Cena did in his match vs Punk or Bryan. That's just a fact.

I have no doubt that you reacted that way, I'm not going to argue what your whims should be. Whether or not you feel that John Tenta ever showed a level of talent that can compare to the example of Cena when he feuded with Bryan or Punk is an opinion. It's an opinion that you chose not to substantiate because you feel that I care enough about the merit of your word to recognize it as a fact. I'm going to need a little more than "That's just a fact" to convince me.

I find the Rock and Stone Cold's constant cussing and banter about asses more disconcerting and low brow than anything Cena's ever done. I guess that was high brow entertainment though.

I never once flaunted the promo supposed superiority of Stone Cold or The Rock in this thread.

I didn't say that, I said he didn't deserve all the blame which he doesn't.

Conclusive reasoning my friend. This is your catch-22; you're saying that John Cena deserves credit for high buy-rates because of his undeniable superiority as a pro-wrestler, but that he also doesn't deserve any blame when a card as powerful as Wrestlemania suffers because that's always just bad booking.

Then we can blame Taker for the same thing only every year.

Even in Taker's prime, he wasn't the guy closing RAW and Smackdown! every single night. Good grief, I'm here to argue the merits of Earthquake. Can we please just get back on track?

 

[enviousdominous]

If this is your argument for why Tenta should beat Cena, couldn't one argue that Tenta's greatest accomplishment was people paying to see him lose to Hogan?

My argument that Earthquake should beat John Cena was substantiated by that point, but the point you referenced wasn't the crux of my argument.

One could argue that John Tenta's greatest accomplishment was that he was allowed to lose to Hogan, I wouldn't make that argument. I think that John Tenta's greatest accomplishment was managing to impress people who come from two totally different schools of pro-wrestling in Giant Baba and Hulk Hogan, I think a close second was managing to win the crowd in spite of being an over villain and having to play ridiculous characters.

My points build to my conclusion, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't just cherry pick one of them. John Tenta's contributions have built my belief that he deserves to defeat John Cena and that he would logically do so in a TNA ring.

In all honesty, I feel bad for you. You're making very passionate, if not absurd arguments for a guy that has no way of making it out of the first round, and everybody thinks you're a idiot. Sounds like a really shitty existence.

You personally surveyed "everybody" on your own valuable time and drew the conclusion that I'm an idiot. I'd never argue with logic like that.

My arguments can get a little passionate if in trying to speak well of the performer that was John Tenta ends up becoming a discussion where I have to defend my character.

Please don't take pity on me. Trust me, I have enough going for me to keep my spirits up even if I've disappointed a group of people that think like you.

 

[enviousdominous]

There really isn't much debate here. You're ignoring reality and objectivity because you made it very clear that you are not a fan of Cena.

There could be so much more debate here.

I'm not ignoring reality or ignoring objectivity.

I admit that I'm not a fan of John Cena's work, which is why I'm so determined to explain any points I have to make against John Cena's ability to win this. I realize that someone who ignores objectivity might take my statements as that of someone who just hates Cena because it's what the cool crowd is into, I have to provide an explanation to at least convince the smart ones of the idea that I can explain why I feel a certain way.

You've made it very clear that in your subjective opinion, John Cena is a better performer.

 

[enviousdominous]

I was going to point this out, but you seem to have done so for me. In WZT hypotheticals, we generally talk about what would happen if a guy in his prime took on another guy in his prime.

Indeed, we wax pro-wrestling philosophies at times that propose what would happen if a performer in his prime had met another performer in their prime in the ring.

You've basically stated here that a prime John Cena would defeat a prime Earthquake.

And you've basically proven to me that my time on this forum wasn't wasted by offering such a thoughtful response. Kudos.

This tournament isn't every tournament Wrestlezone has ever held. We're proposing that John Cena face Earthquake in a TNA ring, that's one Hell of a caveat when you're talking about who would win this match. If they were going at it in a WWE arena, a prime John Cena in a full body cast would win this one because the WWE has in him a home grown talent who has no chance in another arena.

A prime Earthquake would defeat a prime John Cena in a TNA ring.

I see John Cena showing Earthquake the utmost respect, allowing 'Quake to look strong. But this match ends with a ground-shaking Attitude Adjustment.

I see that as the most polite prediction anyone has made so far, in regard to both men. I don't see John Cena disrespecting Earthquake with a squash match, no matter how delighted certain people would be as they know I'd find such a performance disappointing.

I see Earthquake and John Cena wanting to give the crowd their money's worth, I see the crowd only getting what they paid for if John Cena loses.

 

[Con T.]

You've made it very clear that in your subjective opinion, John Cena is a better performer.

Nah, it's something you can make a fairly objective about; Cena's better than Earthquake. In every aspect possible, Cena is better than Earthquake.

Can we agree the most important aspect of professional wrestling is making money?

Great; Cena is probably in the top three of lucrative draws for WWE. John Tenta was in the semi main event of one pay per view. Cena's main evented six Wrestlemanias; Tenta's main evented one Summerslam.

I get I'm going to go nowhere cramming through your head; but Cena is objectively better than Earthquake.

 

[enviousdominous]

So nobody in the Cena camp has any kind of reasonable point? That's some mighty ego issues you have.

The Cena camp? Look man, I should have clarified that I meant what I said in that paragraph and wasn't being sarcastic. I wouldn't be here right now if I just thought that everyone who wants to speak on behalf of John Cena doesn't have a legitimate point, I wouldn't be debating you if I thought that you weren't worth my time.

In all honestly, I'm not humbling myself by debating you. You made it respectful off the bat, so I may as well respond with a comparable level of maturity.

Actually it will be of help of us so we can adjudicate whether your dislike of Cena is coming into play. So stop avoiding the question and answer it.

Here's the thing though, I don't expect every statement I've ever made about John Cena to be audited only to have them potentially used against the reasoning I've shared in regard to this thread.

We can discuss how I feel about John Cena offline or in regard to any of the points I've made earlier if it absolutely has to be on here.

But we aren't talking about any random person. We're talking about you and the fact that you're just as bad as them in this thread.

Do you honestly believe that EVERY person who boos John Cena is an idiot?

You're trying to base your debate against me on the notion that I'm just being cathartic in regard to baseless angst toward John Cena, I'm too big a fan of Earthquake to let my adoration of him be compromised by personal feelings toward John Cena.

The same logic that dictates that every person who boos Cena is an idiot is what's used when someone says that they hate John Cena because it's hip. I would never take the side of someone who can't justify their opinion even if it relates to mine.

People have been attacking Cena since 2005, which is older than the age of this forum. Hell, you probably weren't even born when he debuted.

Hell, you did nothing to argue the point that this quote is in reference to. I agree that there are people who dislike John Cena foolishly, labeling every person who dislikes him as an idiot because of that is just as foolish.

So are you backing Lesnar in this tournament?

My argument was that you were putting the blame of low buy-rates on bad booking, and not on Cena's lack of quality. Let's not wander off topic please.

No, I didn't. Cena rising above the monsters is refreshing for children. By that logic, I should get tired of Austin stunning Vince every week on Raw. Not to mention that I think it's your justification for hating Cena.

In regard to low buy-rates, you suggested that one shouldn't look farther than bad booking. In making that point you concede to me that booking John Cena to win is bad booking. As far as his ability to win goes, according to you, it's up to the bookers and to a lesser extent his fan-base.

Special precautions need to be put into place to stop you doing anything cretinous.

Oh good grief. You start off so nice, and then you act as though you absolutely had to set conditions for this back and forth so you could prevent me from behaving in cretinous ways. You set the precedent that name calling shouldn't happen, I commend you for that. Please apply yourself to your own conditions.

And I don't think this is all at hand here. Kane is one of my favourite wrestlers, and I'd admit he'd lose to Hogan. Earthquake is a guy I think is alright, but he'd lose to Cena. Even as a fan of John Tenta, you need to be able to see that he has no chance here.

And I would fight to the death for your right to have that opinion. You and I are obviously not going to find common ground on the question of who would win a TNA match that put John Cena against Earthquake. Even if we're at each other's throats with points to back up our opinions, at least we're getting to reaffirm what makes us so passionate regarding out favorite performers.

Before the NWO promo, Hogan lost a lot of stock in WCW. It wasn't so much a prime as it was a revitalization.

Can you imagine how much stock John Cena would lose if he performed for TNA? It wouldn't just be what I predict would be an overwhelmingly jeering crowd, it would be the effort of Vince to ruin him. I don't see John Cena being able to reinvent himself as well as Hogan did, I don't see John Cena getting to a point where he can convincingly hold down a main event match in another company's ring.

Are you fucking kidding me? You're being subjective about Cena's prime now? Yeah, you're a cretin. Have fun getting annihilated in this debate.

Oh yeah, and Cena could still beat Earthquake today. Nice grammar too.

I made a typo, mea culpa on that.

I'm not being subjective in regard to where Cena is today when compared to where he was in his prime. Being subjective offends you? You mocked my grammar in regard to a mistake that was clearly a typo, not an obvious lack of understanding when it comes to proper use of words. You're using subjective reasoning to validate calling me a cretin, which is apparently your favorite word.

I wasn't, I was trying to get you to vote the better wrestler and to stop the insults from coming so you can regain some credibility.

You're worried about my credibility? Obviously, you think I'm stupid enough to fall for that kind of tactic in a debate.

I'm here right now offering you an opportunity to change my mind, and you're responding to me with thoughts in regard to that. It wouldn't be credible for me to just vote and not devote any time to debating you. I'm sure that there are subjects out there that we could agree on.

We've tried hearing you out. Everything that comes out of your mouth is drivel, metaphorically and literally.

And I thank you for hearing me out.

I can accept being someone who you see as someone who is only capable of using drivel to promote a point of view, if you've taken the time to review every one of my statements on this website then I take that as a huge compliment.

The saying "Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear, or a fool from any direction." applies quite nicely here.

The saying "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." would explain my reasoning for not wanting to impress you by joining the Cena camp and voting for John Cena. My vote is still for Earthquake.

 

[GI Cake]

Nah, it's something you can make a fairly objective about; Cena's better than Earthquake. In every aspect possible, Cena is better than Earthquake.

Can we agree the most important aspect of professional wrestling is making money?

Great; Cena is probably in the top three of lucrative draws for WWE. John Tenta was in the semi main event of one pay per view. Cena's main evented six Wrestlemanias; Tenta's main evented one Summerslam.

I get I'm going to go nowhere cramming through your head; but Cena is objectively better than Earthquake.

Haiku no you don't understand. John Cena was a failed body builder. Nothing at all like Earthquake who won a few Sumo Wrestling matches! Plus the fans didn't hate Earthquake as much as they hate Cena and rabble rabble rabble I hate Cena.

 

[enviousdominous]

We're really having a debate here? On whether or not John Cena, someone who's the face of the biggest wrestling company in the world would lose to a guy who wore a shark fin on his head?

The shark fin! I remember that too.

Why should anyone lose to a guy whose ring attire makes him look like an Old Navy ambassador?

Enviousdominous, I compare your arguments to trying to push a parked car. You're using a helluva lot of energy and accomplishing nothing. Cena will win this by a large margin and should.

The Lariat Express, I thank you for taking any time out of your day to make a metaphorical comparison regarding my argument.

Here's the thing The Lariat Express, I'm not using a helluva lot of energy here. The Lariat Express, If you regard my posts as having obviously taken a helluva lot of energy, then I obviously haven't accomplished nothing.

This is coming from me - the same guy who tried to say Cena doesn't really like sick kids and only does Make-A-Wish because the WWE tells him to. I find Cena to be what's wrong with modern wrestling. That doesn't mean I'm oblivious to the fact he'd beat a guy who was used as fodder for main eventers.

Hey, you know what, Cena's personal feelings regarding sick kids is a completely different subject. Right now we're arguing his potential in a TNA match against Earthquake. Earthquake is obviously a guy you have no respect for, maybe a few compliments his way would have made your opinion regarding him seem informed.

During Earthquake's time, fodder for main eventers was what worked. This tournament is happening in 2014 in a TNA ring, it's a different time in a different place. In this world, the monster can win.

 

[GI Cake]

Does the TNA Ring actually provide anyone with an advantage that isn't AJ Styles? Wanna know the difference between a WWE ring and a TNA ring? The WWE ring has fans around it. Or is Envious under the impression that a TNA ring has a sumo wrestling circle in it?

 

[enviousdominous]

Nah, it's something you can make a fairly objective about; Cena's better than Earthquake. In every aspect possible, Cena is better than Earthquake.

Oh good, you made time for this.

In every aspect possible? I doubt that your mind possesses that kind of range. Please list every possible aspect and explain why they prove that Cena is better than Earthquake.

Can we agree the most important aspect of professional wrestling is making money?

Indeed we can.

Great;

Super;

Cena is probably in the top three of lucrative draws for WWE. John Tenta was in the semi main event of one pay per view. Cena's main evented six Wrestlemanias; Tenta's main evented one Summerslam.

He's probably one of the top three lucrative draws for WWE? I disagree, I'd probably put him closer to number one if he's booked to lose.

I get I'm going to go nowhere cramming through your head; but Cena is objectively better than Earthquake.

Yeah, cramming through my head is not recommended.

If we're both admitting that we'd get nowhere questioning the reasoning behind each others' points of view, then I accept that you won't be voting for Earthquake in this and I insist that you make your own case for Cena in a post that doesn't involve me.

 

[enviousdominous]

Does the TNA Ring actually provide anyone with an advantage that isn't AJ Styles? Wanna know the difference between a WWE ring and a TNA ring? The WWE ring has fans around it. Or is Envious under the impression that a TNA ring has a sumo wrestling circle in it?

Frankly, I'm under the impression that a TNA ring makes a huge difference.

In comparing John Cena to John Tenta in regard to accomplishments outside of the WWF/WWE, I was making the point that John Tenta has a better track record than John Cena.

The guys who painstakingly put this tournament together thought that it would be wise to make TNA part of the mix, you're mocking them in your attempt to mock me when you ridicule the notion that a TNA arena makes any difference in regard to the potential outcome of the match.

 

[GI Cake]

Frankly, I'm under the impression that a TNA ring makes a huge difference.

In comparing John Cena to John Tenta in regard to accomplishments outside of the WWF/WWE, I was making the point that John Tenta has a better track record than John Cena.

The guys who painstakingly put this tournament together thought that it would be wise to make TNA part of the mix, you're mocking them instead of me when you ridicule the notion that a TNA arena makes any difference in regard to the potential outcome of the match.

If there is any mockery to be had, it's your idea that Earthquake can beat Cena.

But how does Cena and Earthquake entering a TNA ring change anything between two guys who never worked for TNA? Cena is still a 13563123 time champion while Earthquake's biggest accomplishment is he was a sumo wrestler once and he lost to Hogan.

 

[Con T.]

Oh good, you made time for this.

In every aspect possible? I doubt that your mind possesses that kind of range. Please list every possible aspect and explain why they prove that Cena is better than Earthquake.



Indeed we can.



Super;



He's probably one of the top three lucrative draws for WWE? I disagree, I'd probably put him closer to number one if he's booked to lose.



Yeah, cramming through my head is not recommended.

If we're both admitting that we'd get nowhere questioning the reasoning behind each others' points of view, then I accept that you won't be voting for Earthquake in this and I insist that you make your own case for Cena in a post that doesn't involve me.

Did you miss my first post? That's really the only point that needs to be made. If you can't objectively see that John Cena wins this match, I'm sorry, I don't know what to tell you. Other than you need help.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

As a few other posters have said, Cena would come out on top here with the classic formula of the top babyface vs. the 450 pound monster heel. Earthquake would beat Cena down for a good portion of the match in order to sell the fact that Earthquake is over 200 pounds heavier. Earthquake would hit pretty much all of the offense generally associated with a super heavyweight: splashes in the corner, elbow drops, splashes in the center of the ring, etc.

He'd eventually hit his finisher, Cena would kick out, Earthquake would sell shock and dismay while the crowd popped. Cena would eventually manage to rally going for the "Five Moves of Doom", he'd attempt an AA on Earthquake, Quake would slip out of it and regain control for a bit, go for another big avalanche/splash in the corner, Cena would move & cause Quake to ram the turnbuckles, Cena would scoop him up on his shoulders and hit the AA for the win.

 

[enviousdominous]

If there is any mockery to be had, it's your idea that Earthquake can beat Cena.

This is a very vague point, even for you.

Please explain who or what I mocked in making a case that Earthquake deserves to win this encounter.

But how does Cena and Earthquake entering a TNA ring change anything between two guys who never worked for TNA? Cena is still a 13563123 time champion while Earthquake's biggest accomplishment is he was a sumo wrestler once and he lost to Hogan.

TNA has a very different vibe than the WWE, there's also the fact that John Cena performing for what was technically a different company as his WWE character was mildly tested when he performed at One Night Stand. While the event was created by the WWE, there wasn't a single person in that crowd that would identify as more of a WWE fan than they were an ECW fan.

I don't think that TNA wouldn't look at this as though John Cena obviously has to win because he's had so many accomplishments within the WWE, I think that they would look at this as Earthquake being the underdog going up against a very arrogant pro-wrestling entity in John Cena. The person being cheered for during a second wind would be Earthquake, the person who would be cheered for after winning would be Earthquake.

 

[enviousdominous]

Did you miss my first post? That's really the only point that needs to be made. If you can't objectively see that John Cena wins this match, I'm sorry, I don't know what to tell you. Other than you need help.

If you don't see any relevance to my points, please address them and explain why they don't make sense to you. If you want someone outside of our obvious spheres of influence to take one side or the other when the voting is up, then by all means make an attempt to explain why your own points are valid.

I'm not going to check myself into a mental health clinic with the reason being that I'm a pro-wrestling fan who believes that in a TNA ring Earthquake would have a shot at beating John Cena. Apology accepted either way.