Who's The Better Wrestler? Bryan Danielson or John Cena?

[X]

Agreed completely Shocky.

Good ring psychology is not about using the same moves at the end of every match. Obviously finishers are a factor, but to put it in the example you used, if you were in a fight, and you're opponent had seen you fight twelve million times before, and 99% of every fight that you won was with the same finishing sequence, would it not make sense that the opponent would know exactly what was coming? Your logic on that one doesn't make much sense to me...

I'll go with Shocky again in saying all of those matches mentioned, Cena was carried in. How you may say? Most of the wrestling and most of the spots were done by the opposing wrestle---every one of those matches have the same exact formula, which does NOT make for good ring psychology: Cena gets beaten up, comes out of nowhere with his 5 Moves of Doom, wins match. Wow, what a surprise.

A good sign of a good wrestler is their ability to keep you guessing every time they step into the ring. I never know what Danielson is going to do, the possibilities are endless--in a Cena match I know exactly whos going to win and how its going to happen, every time. I've yet to have make a wrong guess about a Cena main event.

Cena just has no skills outside of a match in which he is brawling or it is a hardcore match. His technical abilities are quite simply shit. And while you've said before and it is true that technical wrestling is not the only good kind of wrestling, every one of the greats have been at the very least adequate in their technical abilities. You'll bring up Austin---he was a technical god in his early days. You might bring up Hogan---but quite honestly, you can't deny that the man was of limited wrestling ability at best. He simply was not a very good wrestler in terms of transitions from move to move or the execution of those moves.

And to say that wrestling fans are going to remember Cena vs. HHH, Angle, Edge over Danielson vs. KENTA or Danielson vs. Joe, is ludicrous. The only people that are going to remember Cena matches more are those who have never seen Danielson wrestle.

Also, what is it that you seem to have against indy promotions? Some of if not the best wrestling available in all of history has come from indies for one of the reasons you said yourself: there is no time limit. There is no TV audience to worry about. They can do everything and anything they want to entertain that crowd, and thats why you see amazing moves in indy feds that you will NEVER EVER see in the WWE because they are banned. Take the old ECW, the new ROH, old TNA, or hell even SMW. They consistently put on wrestling that was above and beyond anything you'd see on TV.

No offense of course is meant, mate.

 

[Slyfox696]

I'm going to do some re-arranging and combining of posts...

One word: Resources. The Indy promotions don't have the financial resources to pay Wrestlers to Wrestle exclusively for them and to be able to get a TV or PPV deal. whereas WWE and TNA have said resources to pay for the exclusive rights for Wrestlers. Even in ROH they let their talent work in numerous other promotions keping their financial ties in them to a minimum, TNA has a slightly different system where they let their Wrestlers work Indy events only if the promotion doesn't have US national distribution. WWE has absolute control over the places where their Talent can appear and Wrestle, there are exceptions to them not appearing at Indy events such as CM Punk getting permission to work a ROH event due to problems with the weather preventing Wrestlers getting to the event, and John Cena appearing at some Indy event that I can't remember. But the business side of the Pro Wrestling Industry is a murky place at the best of times in regards to what Wrestlers get paid and all that sort of stuff, we know the basic outline for WWE and TNA employees, but not many people know how Indy Wrestlers are paid in terms of financial gain. But Pro Wrestling is a business in the end and the main goal is to turn a profit.

Also, what is it that you seem to have against indy promotions? Some of if not the best wrestling available in all of history has come from indies for one of the reasons you said yourself: there is no time limit. There is no TV audience to worry about. They can do everything and anything they want to entertain that crowd, and thats why you see amazing moves in indy feds that you will NEVER EVER see in the WWE because they are banned. Take the old ECW, the new ROH, old TNA, or hell even SMW. They consistently put on wrestling that was above and beyond anything you'd see on TV.

But why do indy promotions not have resources? Because they don't appeal to a large enough fanbase to bring in money to become big time.

Indy wrestling appeals to the minority, it always has. Even the great ECW, maybe the biggest indy promotion ever, appealed to a small minority of fans. Look at their ratings and PPV buys. Absolutely pitiful, especially considering the boom that wrestling was in when they were finally on TV and PPV. While the WWF was pulling in ratings in the 5s and 6s, ECW struggled to get a 1.0, something that TNA regularly does in a down cycle of the business. However, because indy wrestling only appeals to a small minority of fans, those fans are likel to like most of what they, and then proceed to call it great.

Let's look at the former darlings of ROH, CM Punk and Samoa Joe. They were called the greatest wrestlers in the world when they were in ROH, and putting on great matches every night. They had great this and great that. Then, they leave...and a couple of months later, somehow Bryan Danielson became the greatest wrestling in ROH. To me, that is pretty suspicious.

It's nothing personal against the indy promotions, but there is a reason that indy wrestling is small time indy wrestling. And, to me, bashing the majority is silly, because there is a reason they are the majority. Indy wrestling is great as a niche, but, overall, the best wrestlers are in the WWE. Because great professional wrestlers put on good matches AND make money. Not one or the other.

And to say that wrestling fans are going to remember Cena vs. HHH, Angle, Edge over Danielson vs. KENTA or Danielson vs. Joe, is ludicrous. The only people that are going to remember Cena matches more are those who have never seen Danielson wrestle.

Which is an incredibly large portion of wrestling fans. Most wrestling fans, particularly in America don't even know who AmDrag or KENTA is. And, there's a reason for that.

True but if you have a good trainer it helps your standing in being able to get bookings and to get noticed by major promotions. So it is important, but if you have the talent then you have the talent, if you don't you you shouldn't really be Wrestling.

So, what does it say about John Cena, that he had a trainer that according to you is not very reputable, for him to become the WWE champion and the focal point of the largest wresting company?

The Majority of the work in the matches was done by the other Wrestler in terms of Wrestling until the end in which his final set of Moves end the match, The exception to the rule is Gimmicked matches, Cena can pull off Gimmick matches quite well. He hardly ever puts up good Singles matches, they are rare events.

I'll go with Shocky again in saying all of those matches mentioned, Cena was carried in. How you may say? Most of the wrestling and most of the spots were done by the opposing wrestle---every one of those matches have the same exact formula, which does NOT make for good ring psychology: Cena gets beaten up, comes out of nowhere with his 5 Moves of Doom, wins match. Wow, what a surprise.

I'm not sure you understand what it means to be carried. Being carried does NOT equal being the aggressor and the person who does the beat down through most of the match. If that were true, almost everyone Hulk Hogan faced from 1989-1995 was carrying Hogan...including guys like Brutus Beefcake, who couldn't carry a paper sack with a forklift. If that were true, every match that HBK wrestles, he would be carried (which would include his match against Cena on Raw).

Carrying a match means that you are the only one who makes the match go. It means that you not only carry the offense, but also the emotional aspects...your the one calling the match, putting each person into their spots, and covering up the, usually gaping, weaknesses of the opponent. Watch Randy Savage vs. Ultimate Warrior at Wrestlemania 7 if you want to see someone carrying a match.

At no time does that happen with Cena. Yes, usually, the other guy is the aggressor. But Cena sells well, and he gets his fans to buy into his pain. He is constantly putting himself in position for the next spot in the match, and the man is never lost in the ring. The beatdown he suffers, he sells so well, that when he make his predictable comeback, people are STILL cheering for him hard. That's called telling a story. It's not called being carried.

Now, look at his match against RVD. Cena carried the entire match. He was the one doing all of the work. He was the one working the crowd into a frenzy. He was the one creating all of the motion and emotion in the match. That match was all Cena and the crowd, RVD was just there barely contributing anything. Just watch the first 5 minutes with the fans booing and chanting at Cena, throwing the hat and shirt back at him and throwing toilet paper at him. RVD might as well have been home in bed at that time because he didn’t do a damn thing. That's what it means to be carrying a match.

I was actually talking in General, but an example of this would be Brian Danielson Vs. Brian "Spanky" Kendrick. It is a short match but it is a good match, it is the amount of time they allow for WWE main events on TV, this one is on youtube it is early on in Ring of Honor history but it is a nice and well done match for the time constraint.

I will check this one out soon. Actually, I probably won't, but at this moment, I fully intend to. lol

Actually good Wrestling Psycology is about Intimidation, not about using the same moves at the end of a match. It is about working an injury that is inflicted. It is about in Kayfabe terms keeping the opponent guessing which move is going to be done next. Ending a match the same way every match gets very boring after a few times.

Good ring psychology is not about using the same moves at the end of every match. Obviously finishers are a factor, but to put it in the example you used, if you were in a fight, and you're opponent had seen you fight twelve million times before, and 99% of every fight that you won was with the same finishing sequence, would it not make sense that the opponent would know exactly what was coming? Your logic on that one doesn't make much sense to me...

That's not true. Good wrestling psychology is putting on a match that logically makes sense, and makes the crowd care about your match. It can be done in a variety of different ways. This is the way that John Cena does it, which, coincidentally, is also the way that HBK does it, and how Bret Hart did it, and how Hulk Hogan did it. It IS good psychology. Subconsciously, it tells people the match is going to end soon, and that gets fans interested in the finale, usually guaranteeing a hot finish. It is the feel-good story of the heroic babyface making a comeback against the bad guy after running into trouble (think about it...is that not how most movies are made?). It is what people, usually, want to see. It is great psychology, because it makes sense, it tells a story, makes people care, and it leads to a hot finish. What else can you ask for from a professional wrestling match?

As far as knowing the moves and not preparing for it...think of football or basketball. Why is it certain plays always work? Why is it a football team can run a play at the end of the game, and still run it successfully? How can Michael Jordan always hit the game-winning shot? Just because you know it's coming, and can plan for it, doesn't mean you can stop it.

There you said it yourself he pretty much just punches and kicks and then proceeds to get his ass kicked and sell, then to bring it home he does his superman thing where all injuries he was supposed to be selling are miraculously gone.

I've never denied that he doesn't use a lot of moves. But using a lot of moves doesn't make you a good wrestler, and not using a lot of moves doesn't make you a bad wrestler.

And, your comment about his selling is off. Watch his Raw match against Benoit for the best proof I can give you. Benoit savagely works the back the entire match, and when Cena makes his comeback, he tries to pick Benoit up and put him in the FU...but he can't, because his back is hurting him so much. He sells long-term, but only when it's necessary.

Cena just has no skills outside of a match in which he is brawling or it is a hardcore match. His technical abilities are quite simply shit. And while you've said before and it is true that technical wrestling is not the only good kind of wrestling, every one of the greats have been at the very least adequate in their technical abilities. You'll bring up Austin---he was a technical god in his early days. You might bring up Hogan---but quite honestly, you can't deny that the man was of limited wrestling ability at best. He simply was not a very good wrestler in terms of transitions from move to move or the execution of those moves.

This is untrue. The Rock was no better in technical abilities than Cena.

And Hogan was not of limited wrestling ability. The man had great wrestling ability. But we'll save that discussion for the Flair/Hogan debate.

There is very little Psycology when that comes up because all Wrestling works on the basis of that if you take out the head you are more likely to win a match due to a restriction of blood flow to the brain making them woozy meaning they are more susceptible to a Pin.

That's not true. Psychology, as you're speaking of it, is limb psychology. And limb psychology is not just limited to head work. It goes for any body part for which it might be used to win a match. Bret Hart worked the back and the leg because that weakens those spots on the body which makes his Sharpshooter effective. John Cena works the back and the head because that is what his FU and STFU work. The FU works the back, and the STFU is a glorified sleeper hold, that cuts off blood to the brain through the carotid artery. Thus, when he's putting HBK in headlocks and front facelocks, and slams him several times...that's good limb psychology.

 

[X]

But you're not acknowledging the fact that ROH has not been given any of the opps that WWE had. The wrestling world is much different today, the NWA no longer rules supreme over everything. When the WWF got started, they had the NWA support, along with the use of their talents, at a time when people still regarded wrestling as being real.

You say that ROH is an indy because it only appeals to a minority of fans---but you have to take into consideration that the majority of fans who like WWE and don't know what ROH is, have never seen a commercial for ROH. They've never seen a Hollywood movie funded by ROH, there are no action figures, no TV deals, nothing to expose them to a larger audience.

And not to sound big headed, but the majority of fans of John Cena, obviously you being excluded, are children. And children simply put, don't know any better. When they grow up they too will realize that Cena's matches really weren't anything special, just as I realized after growing up on Hogan that his matches really weren't anything special. I mean yes, the atmosphere, the story telling, the feuds, amazing. But wrestling quality, not exactly. You'll disagree with me there (you do with everything I say doncha? ) but its my and many others opinion that Hogan did amazing things for wrestling as a business, but didn't contribute jack shit in terms of great wrestling.

About Cena vs Danielson matches being remembered, you kind of dodged my question. If you put on a Bryan Danielson match back to back with a John Cena match, odds are your going to prefer the Danielson match and you're going to remember it. Cena's got the look---but he's all style, no substance.

About the finishing sequence...that is not good ring psychology. You want good ring psychology, look at some old tapes of Raven or Jake the Snake. Thats good ring psychology. Being able to end a match at any given point on any given move is good ring psychology. Guys like HBK have only taken onto the "5 Moves of Doom" strategy over the last couple of years, and thats because the man is old. His body isn't able to hold out like Cena's should be able to with his youth.

And I'd have to disagree again...your ability to cleanly do many moves DOES determine your skill as a wrestler. After all thats what we're talking about here---wrestling. Not entertainment, not putting on a show, going out there and wrestling. And Bryan Danielson not just gets the edge over Cena in that remarks, he blows him straight out of the water. Cena could not be able to do half of the things that Danielson does, and that right there is the largest sign to me that Danielson is the better wrestler. If you work on cars and you know how to fix more things inside of the car, does that not make you better at the job? Moves CAN be used to determine the skill of a wrestler. And Danielson knows more moves then Cena could even think of.

And about the Rock...he was vastly superior in technical skills then Cena is. Take a look at his submission match with Benoit on RAW back in like 2000. Take a look at the Iron Man match with HHH, you'll see some great technical wrestling there.

 

[Slyfox696]

Obviously, ROH is in a little different position because they've only been around for 5 years, but, even the most known indy fed, ECW, could only get ratings that weren't even half of the worst WWF show at the time. Well, they certainly weren't better than Sunday Night Heat. The point is, that indy feds generally appeal only to a small portion of wrestling fans. They have since the WCW broke away from the NWA. And ECW was far ahead of where ROH is in terms of notice amongst wrestling fans.


And I think that matches like Hogan vs. Rock at Wrestlemania 18 speak for themselves. Or how Hogan carried that untalented hack Warrior to such a thrilling Wrestlemania match.

And, I'm sure we'll find something to agree on one of these days. We both like Shelton Benjamin right?

I haven't seen near as many AmDrag matches as I have Cena, but I will take Cena vs. Umaga against anything I've seen from Danielson.

What was Bret Hart's excuse for doing the 5 Moves of Doom? I mean, he's the reason the term even exists. And, I agree that Raven and Jake Roberts were both fabulous wrestlers (we agree!). Of course, in the WWF, Jake Roberts always signified the end of the match with his short-arm clothesline, his one finger lasso, and then did the DDT. Having unpredictable finishes can be great for a match. But so can having finishes in which the crowd knows its coming and is ready to pop big for the finish. If I have one complaint against Cena/HBK match from Raw, it's that they dragged the finish out for too long. The crowd was ready for the finish about ten minutes (of air time..not match time) before it actually happened, and I think they kind of took some of the pop out of the ending.

Cena has the ABILITY to do a variety of moves. Watch some stuff from UPW, or his earlier heel work, or even matches against RVD and HBK. He has the ability to do it. He just doesn't because it is unnecessary for him. For a guy like Danielson, in front of the crowd in which he works, it probably is necessary. I'll say this. If John Cena were to go to ROH, he'd be one of the biggest faces there inside of two years. Now, I may be wrong, and I know I may be ruffling some feathers, but I truly believe that.

 

[X]

Yeah but ECW was only around all together for a total of eight years. EIGHT YEARS, thats nothing! And ECW didn't fail because of their wrestling---they failed because of marketability and because Paul Heyman was one of the worst businessmen in the history of this business.

And true, we both do like Shelton Benjamin I guess there. Yay something we agree on for once!

But that's short lived as I could not disagree more if I tried my hardest---Cena would be the top face in ROH in two years if he were there? Cena couldn't get over in ROH if he were there for fifty years. And part of that has to do with his style being anathema to ROH's style, and part of I'll admit, well most of it has to do with the fact that ROH fans are exactly like ECW fans and TNA fans. They will hate Cena forever, and there is nothing we can do to change that. Whether some of them geniunely hate the guy for his wrestling ability as I used to(I don't hate him as I've said before...I just hate what he represents and his match quality) or they hate him because its the "cool" thing to do(which is absolutely absurd in my opinion).

That's not saying anything against Cena though---but there is just no way in hell Cena could get over in ROH. Not a chance in hell. Not even if it were the beginning of his career like in UPW. His style just does not fit ROH at all. Cena is very slow and methodical in the ring---ROH is extremely fast paced.

But, if Cena has the ability to do these moves, then why doesn't he do them? It would certainly shut up many people, including me. I know you'll say "because that doesn't fit his character, its not realistic for him to do hurricanranas or backflips" but think about that statement for a second. If John Cena does a hurricanrana or lets say a 450 Splash...well then it doesn't really matter whether or not it seems "realistic", because it IS real and he just did it. If Cena were to take on a shitload of new, high risk moves unlike his brawler character it would only help him out. I never understand that argument from people that it isn't "realistic" for a certain wrestler to do certain things. What's realisitic is whether or not they can do it, and if they can, then it doesn't really matter does it?

 

[Slyfox696]

Yeah but ECW was only around all together for a total of eight years. EIGHT YEARS, thats nothing! And ECW didn't fail because of their wrestling---they failed because of marketability and because Paul Heyman was one of the worst businessmen in the history of this business.

ECW failed because they could not make enough money to support their growth. They took a lot of risks and gave a lot of money to a lot of people...and it worked to get them as big as they did, but they could never make enough money.

You have to remember, the biggest time of ECW's growth came at the time in which professional wrestling contracts and popularity were spinning completely out of control. I mean, the WCW paid like three million dollars a year for Bret Hart, a man who carried the WWF, but was never a mega draw. Creative control, huge salaries, big arenas...money was out of control in those days. And, Heyman, thinking he had to keep up because he had a hot product, spend all this money, and hoped that he would eventually get a return on his investment. Unfortunately for him, he never could. He could never get enough fans to fund his promotion despite the great amount of money he was throwing into it. Then, he did get on a major network, but the network was unwilling to allow them to air the very thing that made them unique, because most people did not want to see what ECW was offering.

ECW failed because, simply put, it never appealed to enough people.

I disagree with you on Cena in ROH, but it's pointless to argue about since it'll never happen.

But, if Cena has the ability to do these moves, then why doesn't he do them? It would certainly shut up many people, including me. I know you'll say "because that doesn't fit his character, its not realistic for him to do hurricanranas or backflips" but think about that statement for a second. If John Cena does a hurricanrana or lets say a 450 Splash...well then it doesn't really matter whether or not it seems "realistic", because it IS real and he just did it. If Cena were to take on a shitload of new, high risk moves unlike his brawler character it would only help him out. I never understand that argument from people that it isn't "realistic" for a certain wrestler to do certain things. What's realisitic is whether or not they can do it, and if they can, then it doesn't really matter does it?

The guy is 6'2" and 250 pounds. He's as strong as an ox. Why would he do a hurricarana, which doesn't take advantage of his strength, in favor of a simple punch or forearm? I mean, if given a choice to flip myself and land on my back, or to get punch in the head by someone who can bench press an elephant...I choose the flip. The guy uses moves that take advantage of his phenomenal strength. That's why it's realistic.

And, if you watch him, you know that he can do a lot more moves. But, as I've said, more moves don't make you a better wrestler. And, as far as shutting up his haters, as long as they continue to pay to see him lose, or pay to see him win, the WWE is not going to change anything.

 

[Catlmutln187]

I literally almost died laughing at this topic. This is completely comical.
Bryan Danielson Vs John Cena ? What !!! John Cena is only in the main event because of his mic skills (which are overated) and because he is so over.
Amdrag may not have the worldwide Renown that Cena enjoys but really, come on, Dragon is the master of so many different and unique holds and submissions. I will admit, he has had his share of shitty matches (Hero) but for one to say that a guy that can barely do a STF Is better is ridicolous.
Bryan can finish a match in so many ways, theres Cattle Mutalation, Cross Chicken wing,Armbar variations and boston crabs. Even sometimes resorting to a small package and actualley winning.
John Cena however, does have him on the mic. Dragon is really underated on it but when it comes down to it Cena is way more entertaining but he hasen't really done enough for me to respect him. Watch any of The Dragon/Kenta matches or Dragon/Roderick Strong matches. Those are all out wars. I will actualley think of using the name "John Cena" next to "The American Dragon Bryan Danielson" once I see Cena really show me something different.

 

[Slyfox696]

I laughed when I read the last post, because Cena was criticized for not knowing a bunch of moves, and then was blasted because he doesn't do the STF right. The ironic part comes in when I point out that Cena doesn't use the STF, but rather the STS, which is a completely different move.

In addition, who cares how many different moves someone has? I could go outside right now and put on 17 different holds and locks and slams, and who would give a damn? Probably nobody. It's not the moves you use, it's how you use them. And John Cena uses them to get 80,000 to care about him and how he does in the match, win or lose.

 

[tom2123]

ive just got 2 things to say:

1) the truth is that someone said that indy promotions are not popular because they dont have resources neither did WWE in the beginning they had times of serious financial problems and look at them now they are rich and what im saying is that the wrestlers make the money the money doesnt make the wrestlers
2) just like others have said movesets do not mean a matches quality i saw benoit v angle at royal rumble 03 and most of the time they just keep reversing each others finishers for half the match and thats considered a classic like DDP said he could apply the diamond cutter from like 1000 different ways so does that mean that if i was in a match i could spend 20 minutes using the diamond cutter and that would be a classic but an even harder question how many times has the Dudley Boys used tables or Triple H used a sledgehammer and Batista used a spinebus....... ok maybe that last one was not a good example but as for the rest they happen so often and yet its still fresh and people love and cheer for it

 

[tom2123]

the sad truth is that ive seen cena improving as of late but i think that the internet smarks sort of ruined his reputation because no matter how much he improves every one would still see he as a pathetic wrestler who has no potential or skill

 

[X]

What does it matter if the move is an STS slyfox? Why are you so damn uptight about that? And the STS isn't similiar to the STF? Are you shitting me?

People call it the STF because it's referred to as the STFU, which would make most sense if it was an STF then wouldn't it? Kinda like FU was a play on the F-5, the STFU is a play on the STF? You know, like puns?

What does it matter? He locks on the move incredibly shitty, whether its an STF or an STS. It looks about as painful as a sleeper hold.

 

[Slyfox696]

Well, first, it matters that people call it an STF because usually those people are complaining that Cena does the move poorly. Well, yeah, of course it looks like a poor STF, because that's not the move. Anyone who says Cena doesn't know how to use the STF properly is a complete hypocrite. Because he doesn't use an STF. And, it just makes the person who criticized Cena look ignorant. Which, is exactly the problem Cena has been facing for years now...fans' ignorance.

And, the STF and the STS are completely different moves. They do completely different things, and require a completely different psychology. The STF is a facelock, where you wrap your arm/hands around a guys face, usually on the nose, or right underneath it, and you crank back on the head, applying pressure to the neck and back. The harder you crank back on the face, the more pain it causes.

The STS is completely different. You wrap your arms around the opponents NECK, not face, most importantly, wrapping your arms around the man's carotid artery, cutting off blood, and more importantly oxygen, to the brain thus causing your opponent to black out. Cranking on the neck only occurs from the pressure that is being applied to the cutoff of blood in the carotid artery. The STS is just another version of a sleeper hold really.

Now, how can you say those two moves are anything alike?

 

[Uncle Sam]

I realise that saying the STF is the same as the WTFU (sorry, I mean STFU) may make someone appear ignorant, but it doesn't really make them sound hypocritical. Unless, of course, they are accusing others of being ignorant. I see your point.

Still though, saying the STF is the same as the STFU isn't nearly on the same level of ignorance as even comparing Cena and Danielson. Cena's charisma. Well, if yelling and shaking and making crap puns is charisma, he's got it in bundles. Mic skills? Cena's been annoying since day one. OK, so Danielson may not be a pioneer in those particular areas, but at least he's not infuriatingly repetitive.

I'll be honest, I've only seen five or six of good ol' Bryan's matches and about the same amount on the mic. Ontop of that, I've been force-fed dozens of Cena's - normally to see how good his opponent is at carrying him. Considering this, I still prefer Danielson by far. This man has been Ring of Honor Champion, that's the most prestigious belt in the industry in my honest opinion. Cena's got a modded out, worthless WWE title. Danielson consistently wows me in the few matches I'm drip-fed through the internet and my Ring Of Honor DVDs. Cena's matches have never impressed me, and any good spots have been thanks to his opponent (case in point, Edge/Cena TLC). Danielson has a massive move-set and competes in front of the greatest wrestling fans in the world. Cena gets his asked kicked every match and then makes a comeback against impossible odds, yet again, with his moves of doom. This is simply not a question, it's not even a matter of opinion. It is 10,000% fact that Bryan Danielson is the far better wrestler.

 

[X]

Does it matter what the move is really Slyfox? You can't deny that people confuse it for an STF because it's CALLED the STF(add a U). Its like if your finisher was called the suplexa. Would you not confuse it for a suplex, especially considering the only difference between the two moves (STS & STF that is) is a difference of placing your arms on their head or their neck. Incredibly similiar and to even debate that they aren't is ignorant.

I'm not going to get into the reasons why it is a fact that Danielson is the better wrestler, because I already have.

You continue to enjoy horribly planned, horribly executed and even more horribly boring matches that are conducted by John Cena. I find more excitement watching paint dry, and so does half of every crowd he performs infront of.

 

[Slyfox696]

Does it matter what the move is really Slyfox? You can't deny that people confuse it for an STF because it's CALLED the STF(add a U). Its like if your finisher was called the suplexa. Would you not confuse it for a suplex, especially considering the only difference between the two moves (STS & STF that is) is a difference of placing your arms on their head or their neck. Incredibly similiar and to even debate that they aren't is ignorant.

Does it matter what the move is? No, of course not. He's going to end the match the same way. But, when people bash Cena because they say that he executes an STF poorly, it is just complete ignorance. I mean, if I said Danielson was a poor wrestler because he didn't know how to execute a suplex correctly, but he was really using a suplexa, wouldn't you call me ignorant and dismiss my opinion about wrestling abilities? I mean, I don't even know what a suplexa is, and I imagine most people don't know what a STS is. I don't care why people confuse it, just don't bash Cena for being a poor wrestler when you don't even know what the correct move is. Or, if you do, be willing to admit when you are wrong.

I'm not going to get into the reasons why it is a fact that Danielson is the better wrestler, because I already have.

As long as one person can reasonably disagree and present logical statements as to why, nothing can be a fact. Except that it is a fact that Cena is a better professional wrestler than Danielson. . Just kidding, of course.

You continue to enjoy horribly planned, horribly executed and even more horribly boring matches that are conducted by John Cena. I find more excitement watching paint dry, and so does half of every crowd he performs infront of.

And yet, you can take half of the crowd that hates Cena away, leaving only the half that likes Cena...and that half is still more than double than those who go to an ROH event and enjoy Danielson.

 

[Kasey]

This is a crazy thread. But seriously, I've watched Cena since his days in Rick Bassman's neck of the woods and still have two DVDs in which Cena lulls a crowd of forty to sleep (and in one instance RVD has to have a match just to wake them up). They are two different beasts in present times. Cena is a mediocre performer who relies on scripting and the entire assistance of the WWE marketing staff to get and stay over (which still isn't working...imagine that). As for Danielson? As a pure wrestler he spanks Cena so bad in every department inside the ring that it isn't funny. Cena is the type of guy who can wrestle a match that is good by WWE standards (these days that doesn't really say shit) and typically make it to ten or fifteen minutes when he's not saddled with an elite worker. When Michaels or Edge have a free night, then he can be drug along for the ride when they do their best to hide his shortcomings and in rare cases can break the thirty minute mark. Danielson on the other hand, is a worker's worker. He's not the guy who depends on someone to carry the match, he can carry it on his lonesome. When he's paired with other workers that are actually in his league, then look out. John Cena is a decent "sports entertainer." Which for my taste, equates to shit, in the grand scheme because I value the intelligence of the WWE mark masses like I do discount coupons for a can of Spam. I like wrestling, so Danielson is superior on every valid front for me. Those who like "sports entertainment" can have Cena. I prefer some serious groundbreaking wrestling with top notch psychology, not a guy who airs up his Reebok pumps to get over. Not saying that I hate gimmicks on the whole, but a guy like Cena should be less worried about his wardrobe and more concerned with the effect his lackluster abilities have on his matches.