Why did the WWE sabotage DB's push?

[Spidey Revivey]

Never said it was. Not once. This issue has been resolved. Let's move on.

As long as you don't provide another horrible example of WWE not always being perfect, I agree with you.

Now, this, I could not possibly disagree with more. One of the biggest problems today is that most faces are TOO GENERIC. Every example of an over the top character you gave had something in common. Any guesses? They're all HEELS.

The superheroes that were Orton, Cena, Sheamus, and Kingston are over-the-top characters.

Those were faces.

Bryan wasn't generic in Team Hell No, which is what his role was before this angle began. Not at all. He actually had a gimmick, one that we could see in action every week.

An over-the-top comedic anger management needed "NO!" gimmick.

You're making this easy.

What exactly is Cody Rhodes' gimmick?

He teams with his brother as the pair that couldn't be vanquished by the evil corporation. This is mentioned every week.

Or Kofi Kingston's?

The West African superhero for boys and girls to rally behind.

Or Christian's?

This name hasn't been on television to even have a gimmick right now.

Generic mid card babyface is their gimmick. It's why they can disappear for months at a time and have no one notice or care. We don't need any more of that. Big E and Goldust would fall into the same category if not for their distinct looks. Because WWE doesn't know what the fuck to do with faces.

You mean WWE can't give everybody an original theme to run with that everybody would like.

You are comparing apples to penises here, sir. Big Show LED THE FUCKING CROWD IN YES CHANTS. Even Lance Storm said he would be pissed if he were Bryan. Does his opinion matter, or only the bookers?

Lance Storm's opinion is entirely relevant to this whole discussion. I can't argue this at all.

1. Don't know. Seems like a lot. I would guess they've main evented nine or ten PPVs against each other, which is fucking ridiculous.

6. Rock & Austin fought in that many as well, but no one ever complains about it.

2. Singles, probably '09, that I remember. They have faced in multi-man matches on PPV since then, however.

So it's been almost 5 years since they fought 1-on-1. A lifetime of storyline and development.

3. Yep, they are. Because of exactly what I've been saying all along: the WWE can not build new stars to save their fucking life. Whether they are against each other every single month on PPV or not, they have been the WWE's "Top two stars" for a very long time and people are sick of it. Monday night's RAW was the LOWEST RATED RAW THIS YEAR. The "two biggest stars" are having a contract signing to the "biggest match of all-time" and it gets the LOWEST RATING OF ANY RAW THIS YEAR. And we are in fucking December. That's a lot of RAWs. Many of them which were headlined by *gasp* Daniel Bryan.

They built Daniel Bryan. They build CM Punk and even though right now he's not the shit, Langston. They are also in the process of building Roman Reigns as clearly as anyone can see, and have even shown some sway with Cody Rhodes and Dean Ambrose.

But yeah, they can't build any new stars. I think you mean they can't build new stars fast.

What's worse? An IWC smark or someone (who themselves is an IWC smark) who fights the good fight pwning those noobz? Let me clue you in on something: there is no such thing as a smark anymore. At some point in the last few years, the cool, smarky thing to do became to start defending the product in all almost all instances since it would be the OPPOSITE of what a smark would normally do.

Fascinating.

BTW, if someone honestly believes there is a conspiracy against their favorite wrestler to purposely hold them back, they are a straight up MARK. Do we still use that term here in Internet land?

Ask them. I'm only along for the ride.

Wish in one hand, shit in the other, and see which one fills up first.

You stole my book on corny clichés, didn't you?

People expect that because THAT's WHAT PEOPLE WANT.

Yep. Psychology. Makes books and tv series worth checking out.

As WWE has clearly shown many times, they could give a fuck less about giving us what we want. They will give us what THEY want. And that probably involves Alberto Del Rio or Sheamus.

Once again it doesn't even enter the mind of an internet fan to even think that maybe there are people out there that enjoy watching ADR and Sheamus and are willing to buy tickets to see them.

And this whole "what we want" crap is stupid. As a whole nobody agrees on what they want and then bitch about it. Case in point I do like Daniel Bryan and want him to win the Royal Rumble and take the belt off of a heel. Many many people here don't. It's entirely subjective and to even use that phrase "what we want" is the definition of not thinking clearly.

The WWE's complete inability to create new stars.

SEE Bryan, Punk, Langston, etc

Ok, let me clarify what "headlining a PPV" is. It means main event, or at the very least, semi-main event. Opening WrestleMania in an 18 second WHC match and then going on 4th at Extreme Rules prior to a Ryback match, a divas match, Punk/Jericho and Cena/Lesnar is NOT headlining a PPV.

You say you don't care if Bryan goes for the title, but say he doesn't headline pay per views unless it's against champions like Cena, Orton, and Punk.

Pick one or the other and stick with it.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Lol. So I guess there is no more discussion on why WWE did or did not sabotage Daniel Bryan's push? A lot of this bickering back and forth between the two of you has gotten a little out of hand and off topic. And then there are a lot of completely false points(like Kofi Kingston not being a generic face). I bring out a bunch of valid points pertaining to the topic at hand and see people still having a pissing contest.

 

[Mark Henry's Beard]

The superheroes that were Orton, Cena, Sheamus, and Kingston are over-the-top characters.

Those were faces.

Kingston? What the fuck product are you watching? Kofi, the superhero. Lmao. I must have missed that.

An over-the-top comedic anger management needed "NO!" gimmick.

You're making this easy.

Yes, his gimmick was so over the top and ridiculous that it made him the most popular wrestler in the entire fucking company.

He teams with his brother as the pair that couldn't be vanquished by the evil corporation. This is mentioned every week.

Do you know what a "gimmick" is? That's not a gimmick. That's just something he recently did. He doesn't talk. He doesn't have segments. He goes to the ring and he wrestles. He doesn't have a gimmick currently.

The West African superhero for boys and girls to rally behind.

Oh, THAT gimmick. In other words, "His gimmick is that he's from West Africa and he's a face". Once again, that's not a gimmick. Maybe if Kofi had a gimmick, the little boys and girls that are supposed to rally behind him would give a shit about him.

[QUOTE
6. Rock & Austin fought in that many as well, but no one ever complains about it.[/QUOTE]

Rock and Austin are two of the three biggest stars in the history of the business. And I'm pretty sure the internet was not abuzz prior to their third Wrestlemania match. That was overkill even for Rock/Austin.

So it's been almost 5 years since they fought 1-on-1. A lifetime of storyline and development.

Yeah, if people actually developed in the WWE. If this feels stale even after four years (it does), it's because Cena is the exact same character he was four years ago and Orton is basically the same as well, except there's the Authority in place of the Legacy. The numbers do not lie. People are not into this angle. You can't even blame the ratings on Monday Night Football, as that game was basically over by the second quarter.

They built Daniel Bryan. They build CM Punk and even though right now he's not the shit, Langston. They are also in the process of building Roman Reigns as clearly as anyone can see, and have even shown some sway with Cody Rhodes and Dean Ambrose.



But yeah, they can't build any new stars. I think you mean they can't build new stars fast.

When Daniel Bryan, Big E Langston, Roman Reigns, Cody Rhodes, and Dean Ambrose are ACTUALLY stars, let me know. Just because they plan on pushing the fuck out of someone doesn't mean it will make them a star. Making more than three new stars in TEN FUCKING YEARS doesn't seem like I'm asking them to do a whole lot. Del Rio, Sheamus, Lashley. They do try. But, they a) often push the wrong people, and b) broken record here....DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET FACES OVER.

Once again it doesn't even enter the mind of an internet fan to even think that maybe there are people out there that enjoy watching ADR and Sheamus and are willing to buy tickets to see them.

And this whole "what we want" crap is stupid. As a whole nobody agrees on what they want and then bitch about it. Case in point I do like Daniel Bryan and want him to win the Royal Rumble and take the belt off of a heel. Many many people here don't. It's entirely subjective and to even use that phrase "what we want" is the definition of not thinking clearly.

By "what we want", I was referring to the live crowd reactions. They don't listen to them anymore. They respond in more of a "Oh, you think so? Well, you're wrong. Let me show why our way is better" sort of manner.

SEE Bryan, Punk, Langston, etc

You have a very loose definition of star. You listed one right there. Bryan is close, SHOULD BE a star, by now, but they fucked that up, hence this topic. They are gonna try with Big E, but as of now, he has barely set foot off the ground and you wanna already label him a star. Do you actually work for WWE, by any chance?

You say you don't care if Bryan goes for the title, but say he doesn't headline pay per views unless it's against champions like Cena, Orton, and Punk.

Pick one or the other and stick with it.

What the fuck are you talking about in that convoluted ass sentence?

Clearly you forgot that he did headline several ppvs with Sheamus. 5 Star matches they were not, but he has headlined and he is still on the rise.

You said that. Then, I pointed out that in no way, shape or form, did he and Sheamus "headline" any PPV in the history of the world. Then, your response was to have a stroke and type it out before clicking "submit".

 

[Spidey Revivey]

Brace yourselves: A Lot of Off-Topic Discussion coming your way. Called it.

But no worries, I'll get back to the main subject.

Kingston? What the fuck product are you watching? Kofi, the superhero. Lmao. I must have missed that.

One that kids can understand but you can't. Ask any child who watches WWE what Kofi Kingston is. Being a colorful fan favorite with children getting behind him is a gimmick. Worked for Ultimate Warrior. Works for him. And he doesn't even have to cut a psycho-feuled promo to pull it off.

Yes, his gimmick was so over the top and ridiculous that it made him the most popular wrestler in the entire fucking company.

I never said ridiculous. Once again you put words where there are none.

Do you know what a "gimmick" is? That's not a gimmick. That's just something he recently did. He doesn't talk. He doesn't have segments. He goes to the ring and he wrestles. He doesn't have a gimmick currently.

gim·mick

n. a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business.

Guess what? That too is a gimmick. I had to give you the definition. Clearly you don't know what it is.

Oh, THAT gimmick. In other words, "His gimmick is that he's from West Africa and he's a face". Once again, that's not a gimmick. Maybe if Kofi had a gimmick, the little boys and girls that are supposed to rally behind him would give a shit about him.

I redirect you to the actual definition.

Rock and Austin are two of the three biggest stars in the history of the business. And I'm pretty sure the internet was not abuzz prior to their third Wrestlemania match. That was overkill even for Rock/Austin.

They're the two biggest stars the same way Cena & Orton are. Don't be hypocritical.

Yeah, if people actually developed in the WWE. If this feels stale even after four years (it does), it's because Cena is the exact same character he was four years ago and Orton is basically the same as well, except there's the Authority in place of the Legacy. The numbers do not lie. People are not into this angle. You can't even blame the ratings on Monday Night Football, as that game was basically over by the second quarter.

Once again this fanboyism that the characters have been the same since 5 years ago. It's false. The Legacy doesn't resemble The Authority in no way except Orton is in both.

What numbers? You mean the two weeks or so of Cena/Orton? Compared to the one thing WWE should care about, the pay per views, that did give Bryan a chance?

When Daniel Bryan, Big E Langston, Roman Reigns, Cody Rhodes, and Dean Ambrose are ACTUALLY stars, let me know. Just because they plan on pushing the fuck out of someone doesn't mean it will make them a star. Making more than three new stars in TEN FUCKING YEARS doesn't seem like I'm asking them to do a whole lot. Del Rio, Sheamus, Lashley. They do try. But, they a) often push the wrong people, and b) broken record here....DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET FACES OVER.

I redirect you straight back to my first post in this thread where it says the company knows how to do their job better than some whining guy on the internet does.

By "what we want", I was referring to the live crowd reactions. They don't listen to them anymore. They respond in more of a "Oh, you think so? Well, you're wrong. Let me show why our way is better" sort of manner.

Those live crowd reactions where they cheer the good guy and boo the bad guy?

Yeah. Come back to me when they chant "We Want Bryan" for a few weeks, then you've made a point.

You have a very loose definition of star.

Coming from someone who doesn't know the definition of gimmick, that's a compliment.

You listed one right there. Bryan is close, SHOULD BE a star, by now, but they fucked that up, hence this topic. They are gonna try with Big E, but as of now, he has barely set foot off the ground and you wanna already label him a star. Do you actually work for WWE, by any chance?

Now we get back on-topic. I labeled these men stars being built. You said there were none. Daniel Bryan is a star. You can hear that every time he comes out to the ring. He doesn't need the WWE Championship and he doesn't need to outstay his welcome in The Authority angle. The whole point as I've already made several times that you gloss over is that the Bryan/Orton feud was just for The Authority to gain strong grounds in WWE. Everybody paying attention knew this. And now that Bryan isn't facing "The Man" people are really going to start complaining that WWE doesn't make new faces?

He's over. He can instantly get back into the fold with Orton after the next pay per view.

What the fuck are you talking about in that convoluted ass sentence?

I suppose with your mentality that would come off as convoluted. I'll rephrase it.

At first you went on a tirade about how you didn't care to see Daniel Bryan as the champion. You made a point to mention that 3 or so times (about as many as your "CAN'T BUILD NEW STARS" rant). But then you gave me a list of people he faced at pay per views that were champions and then told me to name someone who wasn't any of those.

Let me point out that wrestling ppvs are a cycle. To even suggest to me not to name a big name like Cena and Orton was a challenge regardless and would be for anyone who's been in the title picture. But I did.

Clearly you forgot that he did headline several ppvs with Sheamus. 5 Star matches they were not, but he has headlined and he is still on the rise.

You said that. Then, I pointed out that in no way, shape or form, did he and Sheamus "headline" any PPV in the history of the world. Then, your response was to have a stroke and type it out before clicking "submit".

strōk

n. 1.stoppage of blood flow to brain: a sudden blockage or rupture of a blood vessel in the brain resulting in, e.g. loss of consciousness, partial loss of movement, or loss of speech.

I didn't suffer any irregularities except possible secondhand stupidity. You gave me a ******ed challenge with naming a superstar he headlined a pay per view with that wasn't the big three. So I gave it back ******edly. And while we are at it:

head·line

v. appear as the star performer at.

So he has headlined. People paid to see him beat Sheamus.

And now that I've given you three definitions to things you didn't know, I feel like I've made progress today.

 

[Mark Henry's Beard]

One that kids can understand but you can't. Ask any child who watches WWE what Kofi Kingston is. Being a colorful fan favorite with children getting behind him is a gimmick. Worked for Ultimate Warrior. Works for him. And he doesn't even have to cut a psycho-feuled promo to pull it off.

Doesn't work for him. He's not fucking over. Are you still watching episodes of RAW from 2009? Kofi Kingston hasn't been relevant in ages. He was recently gone for months and he didn't even receive a pop when he returned. Wearing brightly colored clothing is not a gimmick.

I never said ridiculous. Once again you put words where there are none.

You said his gimmick was over the top. This is starting to just get fucking stupid. Let's just play semantics all night long.

gim·mick

n. a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business.

Guess what? That too is a gimmick. I had to give you the definition. Clearly you don't know what it is.



I redirect you to the actual definition.

Holy fucking shit. Tell me, since when does Webster's fucking dictionary define wrestling terms? "Gimmick" in wrestling is not the literal fucking dictionary definition of the word.

Gimmick

The character portrayed by a wrestler. Can also be used to refer specifically to the motif or theme evoked by a character, as indicated by their name, costume or other paraphernalia.

They're the two biggest stars the same way Cena & Orton are. Don't be hypocritical.

The two biggest stars of an era that literally draws less than half as much as the Rock and Austin's era. That right there should clue you in as to the difference, and the fact that all eras are not created equal. Austin vs. Rock was MONEY. That's why they did it six times. They've done Cena vs. Orton six times because they don't have anything better to do.

Once again this fanboyism that the characters have been the same since 5 years ago. It's false. The Legacy doesn't resemble The Authority in no way except Orton is in both.

The point is that the last time they fought one on one at a PPV, John Cena was the same character he's been for ten years, and Orton was a sadistic heel being backed by a stable. How has any of that changed? They're four years older. That's the only real difference.

What numbers? You mean the two weeks or so of Cena/Orton? Compared to the one thing WWE should care about, the pay per views, that did give Bryan a chance?

Easy to say that when the Cena/Orton headlined PPV hasn't even occured yet, much less had the buy rate numbers released for it. We'll see then.

I redirect you straight back to my first post in this thread where it says the company knows how to do their job better than some whining guy on the internet does.

Let's not open this giant can of moronic worms again. You are a human brick wall.



[QUOTE}Those live crowd reactions where they cheer the good guy and boo the bad guy?

Yeah. Come back to me when they chant "We Want Bryan" for a few weeks, then you've made a point.[/QUOTE]

Why the fuck do you think they chant YES whenever the Authority are doing promos? YES = WE WANT BRYAN.

Now we get back on-topic. I labeled these men stars being built. You said there were none. Daniel Bryan is a star. You can hear that every time he comes out to the ring. He doesn't need the WWE Championship and he doesn't need to outstay his welcome in The Authority angle. The whole point as I've already made several times that you gloss over is that the Bryan/Orton feud was just for The Authority to gain strong grounds in WWE. Everybody paying attention knew this. And now that Bryan isn't facing "The Man" people are really going to start complaining that WWE doesn't make new faces?

He's over. He can instantly get back into the fold with Orton after the next pay per view.

He is over. But, he was far more over in August. They caught lightning in a bottle and they let it escape. If it indeed is their plan to build him back up, good for them. But the perfect time for them to do that has already passed.

I suppose with your mentality that would come off as convoluted. I'll rephrase it.

At first you went on a tirade about how you didn't care to see Daniel Bryan as the champion. You made a point to mention that 3 or so times (about as many as your "CAN'T BUILD NEW STARS" rant). But then you gave me a list of people he faced at pay per views that were champions and then told me to name someone who wasn't any of those.

Let me point out that wrestling ppvs are a cycle. To even suggest to me not to name a big name like Cena and Orton was a challenge regardless and would be for anyone who's been in the title picture. But I did.




strōk

n. 1.stoppage of blood flow to brain: a sudden blockage or rupture of a blood vessel in the brain resulting in, e.g. loss of consciousness, partial loss of movement, or loss of speech.

I didn't suffer any irregularities except possible secondhand stupidity. You gave me a ******ed challenge with naming a superstar he headlined a pay per view with that wasn't the big three. So I gave it back ******edly. And while we are at it:

head·line

v. appear as the star performer at.

So he has headlined. People paid to see him beat Sheamus.

And now that I've given you three definitions to things you didn't know, I feel like I've made progress today.

Opening match of WrestleMania and fourth match of Extreme Rules is not "appearing as the star performer". For someone that loves quoting the dictionary, you might want to take a gander inside of it.

Oh, and for the record, he never beat Sheamus. And Bryan was a heel, so they would have been paying to see Sheamus beat HIM. It's a moot point, however, because no one on Earth bought either of those PPVs because of the Sheamus/Daniel Bryan feud. I am done with this conversation because there really is no getting through to you about anything. You're just pulling things out of your ass by this point.

 

[DietPepsiRocks]

they didn't even need to help get him over. He was already over, I dont get why they figured they had to get him over with the fans with the sympathy route. It worked, even more people like him, but i just don't get how management clearly doesn't favor him. Is it because he doesn't do backstage politics?

 

[LuckyLouie]

I look at it like this, if they let DB win the title now. Here is the list of people he would fight.
- Cena
- Orton
- ADR
- SHow
- Henry
- Ziggle ( Id like this )
- Sandow ( also a yes )
- CM Punk
- Ryback
- Rey
- Shaemus
- Not counting UNdertaker, Lesnar, Triple H.

Thats the current main event picture. Outside of Punk I think anything else would really be a waste. They could wait and build some more stars like Cesaro, think of a match, Wyatts, Zyann, Fandango, The Shield, Barret, Big E and I think Titus and not the other one. Give them some time to be stars and give Bryan a chance to build a legacy. He just took the torch out of Cenas hands, it will take some time for him to start rebuilding.

 

[DietPepsiRocks]

yeah but what worries me is that they're going to unify the titles at WM and make it all one championship moving forward, and they're really high on Langston and Reigns. Those guys might wear the belt next year, and Bryan will be left in the dust. This was their opportunity and I think maybe it was his only opportunity. He's one of the best wrestlers in the world and the best one pound for pound on the roster and they didn't let him have a legit reign and its like a slap in the face to his hard work. I know wrestlers don't need a title to have a brilliant career, but come on, he deserves at least a reign, right? I just hope he doesn't get forgotten about moving forward because they have all these young guys coming up that will get a shot.