Why the Love for Sting?

[MCMG]

Now i get that Sting is a legend and all that. Huge in WCW and the first person in the TNA hall of fame. He is massively popular and understandably so. However, he is 54 years old and still part of TNA's biggest storylines each year. FIFTY-FOUR.

I am a fan of Sting but I have some problems with him.

The obvious is not putting over of talent. Why should he be there every single year competing for the world title. It is year-round as well and especially at the biggest events of the year. Lockdown or Slammiversry he is there. I wouldn't be surprised if he faces Bully Ray for the world title at this years Slammiversry.

The biggest feuds and story-lines involve him. I'm sure an argument against this is Cena in the WWE but we get breaks from him. Punk is an example for the last 18 months and at least his feuds don't end Raw every single week. Moreover, Cena is in the prime of his career and puts people over in matches.

Sting wins way too much. If you are going to be a fifty-four legend than at least put people over. It is not like the Undertaker who has one match a year. Who has really benefited from a push thanks to Sting?

It is not like TNA don't have the talent in the roster. They do. Bobby Roode, Aries, Styles, Joe, Morgan, Hernandez, Hardy, Anderson and Kurt Angle. That is enough to get through an entire year without having to use Sting. But they do and no-one really cares. In fact, it seems encouraged.

It just seems that the world is full of praise for Sting, and although I like him, I am sick of it. Maybe I am overreacting but I feel that Sting is overused in TNA and it is time he should step aside.

 

[blockanWo]

He has months breaks at a time, and hasnt been in the world title picture for over a year. Infact, I dont believe hes been in the title picture since the whole Immortal thing finished.

Sure he gets a fair bit of air time, but hes always in a lot of matches with other people. With younger members of the roster. Him losing to people every month doesnt put people over.

He is TNA's Undertaker, he is a marquee member of the roster. Its silly for them not to roll him out every 3 months for a little feud.

 

[Miz_Mark]

It's been almost 19 months since Sting held the title. If he does end up challenging for the title at Slammiversary, that will be nearly 2 full years since he last held it.

Sting is a major player in big angles when he's on TV, but he routinely takes time off, and when he is on TV, he isn't always in the title feud, and if he is involved in the big angle, he is often not the folcal point of the angle.

And despite a wealth of victories, Sting also has numerous losses in TNA and has helped to put guys over. I don't think the criticism here is justified.

 

[MCMG]

It's been almost 19 months since Sting held the title. If he does end up challenging for the title at Slammiversary, that will be nearly 2 full years since he last held it.

Sting is a major player in big angles when he's on TV, but he routinely takes time off, and when he is on TV, he isn't always in the title feud, and if he is involved in the big angle, he is often not the folcal point of the angle.

And despite a wealth of victories, Sting also has numerous losses in TNA and has helped to put guys over. I don't think the criticism here is justified.

Slammiversary 10, 11 and 12 he was in world title matches. In my opinion that is diabolic that he is continued to get he biggest spot at the ppv each year. Fair enough he lost those matches but enough is enough.

4 of the last 7 Bound For Glory's he has been in a world title match. He has also faced Hogan and the Aces of Eights. If that is Cena than people are crying over the lack of imagination. The product being boring and stale. However, this is a 54 year old working on a two-hour a week show with one world title. It seems he is hogging all the spotlight.

 

[Miz_Mark]

Slammiversary 10, 11 and 12 he was in world title matches. In my opinion that is diabolic that he is continued to get he biggest spot at the ppv each year. Fair enough he lost those matches but enough is enough.

4 of the last 7 Bound For Glory's he has been in a world title match. He has also faced Hogan and the Aces of Eights. If that is Cena than people are crying over the lack of imagination. The product being boring and stale. However, this is a 54 year old working on a two-hour a week show with one world title. It seems he is hogging all the spotlight.

He's hogging all the spotlight because he's had a lot of title matches despite, again, not holding the title for nearly 2 years? You also point out that he has lost several of the title matches you're talking about, yet he doesn't put guys over?

Cena main evented every PPV he participated in despite not having the title for a year and a half. Sting does not main event every PPV he participates in, title or no, he is fine with having a big match lower on the card.

Sting is also not THE story when he is part of the main event angle. When he's in the big angle, he is one of the men standing up to the big stable. He's in a big PPV tag match, or a big PPV team elimination match. He was one of several people battling Aces and Eights, not THE guy taking out Nexus, to draw a Cena comparison seeing as you see the 2 as similar. Now that Bully has turned, he is ONE of the people who was wronged, but not the only one or even the main one. Hulk and Brooke are both bigger victims here. Granted, Sting will probably end up wrestling Bully seeing as he's the one of those 3 characters who can best work, but he is not the folcal point of the angle, let alone of the show.

Sting frequently has title matches, but he loses them as frequently as he wins them, thus putting people over. He's kept away from the title for a good long while, and while he's been a regular participant in big angles within the company, he has not been the main factor in any angle for years now. I don't find the Cena comparison valid.

 

[MCMG]

He's hogging all the spotlight because he's had a lot of title matches despite, again, not holding the title for nearly 2 years? You also point out that he has lost several of the title matches you're talking about, yet he doesn't put guys over?

Cena main evented every PPV he participated in despite not having the title for a year and a half. Sting does not main event every PPV he participates in, title or no, he is fine with having a big match lower on the card.

Sting is also not THE story when he is part of the main event angle. When he's in the big angle, he is one of the men standing up to the big stable. He's in a big PPV tag match, or a big PPV team elimination match. He was one of several people battling Aces and Eights, not THE guy taking out Nexus, to draw a Cena comparison seeing as you see the 2 as similar. Now that Bully has turned, he is ONE of the people who was wronged, but not the only one or even the main one. Hulk and Brooke are both bigger victims here. Granted, Sting will probably end up wrestling Bully seeing as he's the one of those 3 characters who can best work, but he is not the folcal point of the angle, let alone of the show.

Sting frequently has title matches, but he loses them as frequently as he wins them, thus putting people over. He's kept away from the title for a good long while, and while he's been a regular participant in big angles within the company, he has not been the main factor in any angle for years now. I don't find the Cena comparison valid.

My problem is only in part due to him not putting people over. He does put some people over but RVD, Anderson and Bobby Roode hardly needed a win over Sting. What they need his him of the roster and giving an extra spot at the top of the card. Indeed, he even beat Matt Morgan a few years ago. Ridiculous if you ask me.

The Cena comparison is simply because I feel there is double standards. Cena apparently hoggs all the spotlight but there are two shows a week and two world titles with an extra 2/3 major feuds at any time. The significance of his feuds can generally be overlooked because they are diluted by the rest of the roster. Sting's cannot. It is ALWAYS at the forefront of TNA's plans. Yes, I understand TNA is a smaller company but that means they should be developing quicker.

I agree that the Aces and Eights storyline is not about him but there is no need for him to be there. Like I said, there are more deserving guys on the roster than Sting. Why does Hernandez waste his career teaming with Chavo while Sting headlines each major TNA PPV.

I'd just hope by now that TNA and Sting would have realised that it is not in their best interests to continue with him at the top of the major cards each year.

 

[Dirk]

Let me pose a question: If you forget about Cena for now and compare him to 'Taker, do you think Vince would have booked the Undertaker differently, had he aged better?

 

[TellMeWhy]

My problem is only in part due to him not putting people over. He does put some people over but RVD, Anderson and Bobby Roode hardly needed a win over Sting. What they need his him of the roster and giving an extra spot at the top of the card. Indeed, he even beat Matt Morgan a few years ago. Ridiculous if you ask me.

The Cena comparison is simply because I feel there is double standards. Cena apparently hoggs all the spotlight but there are two shows a week and two world titles with an extra 2/3 major feuds at any time. The significance of his feuds can generally be overlooked because they are diluted by the rest of the roster. Sting's cannot. It is ALWAYS at the forefront of TNA's plans. Yes, I understand TNA is a smaller company but that means they should be developing quicker.

I agree that the Aces and Eights storyline is not about him but there is no need for him to be there. Like I said, there are more deserving guys on the roster than Sting. Why does Hernandez waste his career teaming with Chavo while Sting headlines each major TNA PPV.

I'd just hope by now that TNA and Sting would have realised that it is not in their best interests to continue with him at the top of the major cards each year.

Why do you insist on making this false asinine statement when you've been proven wrong time and time again. Sting does not headline each PPV. Stop trying to force everyone to turn on Sting just because people don't like John Cena. Sting is a legend used to advance angles in TNA. He hasn't headlined a PPV in about a year. Your Cena comparison is invalid. He's TNA's Undertaker except more healthier. If Taker was as healthy as Sting and not as banged up, he'd probably continue to work regular and still be winning world championships and actively competing and going over younger guys on the roster like how he was doing before he started competing once a year. Sting is on the roster being paid. Let him work. You want TNA to book him to keep losing every match he's in so that anyone who scores a victory over Sting becomes meaningless like how WWE books Chris Jericho or something? Please. Sting's role in TNA is fine.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Sting is in the same league for TNA that Taker is for Vince, he doesn't job because it's not in TNA's interest for him to do so first and foremost. They are paying top dollar for limited matches a year, those matches are not likely to be losses unless they are part of a wider plan. Those guys losing to Sting are losing to Sting...the most over worker never to work for Vince and a guy who has mixed it for 25 years in main events. They win even in a loss to him but an actual win won't do as much cos they're not beating that man at his prime, but losing to a storied veteran and learning from him in the process can only help them.

Now I don't know Steve Borden's mindset, and he is not in the physical state Undertaker is, who certainly should end the streak now or retire after beating Punk as the tipping point is being reached for him, where to continue would tarnish the career. Sting can still "go" to an extent and over one last run would be far more welcomed for him than Hogan.

Chris Jericho isn't booked meaninglessly, he has a refreshing mindset in that another title/main event/big win isn't as important as being among the best, developing others and the show itself are more important. If he gets Barrett it'll be a great match... If he gets Fandango then he gets the 18 second win and it'll still help Fandango get over with a post match beatdown etc. Beating Jericho is the norm, but even if you lose to him at Mania or a house show and you're new, you're sharing the ring with the first Undisputed champ... that role is crucial for both companies and Sting's is fine doing what he is doing, Jericho's is fine - Taker, time to hang it up.

 

[andrewp488]

Sting hardly wrestles nowadays I mean he was the gm then reinstated as wrestler didn't actually wrestle that much then interim gm then wrestler again and if I'm not mistaken most weeks we see sting in a promo backstage or in the ring he hasn't really wrestled that much so how can a guy put over other wrestlers like hardy joe angle magnus etc if he isn't wrestling ? Tna use sting sparingly when it comes to in ring competition so this little rant isn't justified granted he is on impact most weeks but rarely wrestles so therefore can't put anyone over

 

[Miz_Mark]

My problem is only in part due to him not putting people over. He does put some people over but RVD, Anderson and Bobby Roode hardly needed a win over Sting. What they need his him of the roster and giving an extra spot at the top of the card. Indeed, he even beat Matt Morgan a few years ago. Ridiculous if you ask me.

The Cena comparison is simply because I feel there is double standards. Cena apparently hoggs all the spotlight but there are two shows a week and two world titles with an extra 2/3 major feuds at any time. The significance of his feuds can generally be overlooked because they are diluted by the rest of the roster. Sting's cannot. It is ALWAYS at the forefront of TNA's plans. Yes, I understand TNA is a smaller company but that means they should be developing quicker.

I agree that the Aces and Eights storyline is not about him but there is no need for him to be there. Like I said, there are more deserving guys on the roster than Sting. Why does Hernandez waste his career teaming with Chavo while Sting headlines each major TNA PPV.

I'd just hope by now that TNA and Sting would have realised that it is not in their best interests to continue with him at the top of the major cards each year.

If you think Bobby Roode, Anderson, and RVD (and to a lesser extent Kurt Angle) did not benefit from beating Sting, you are either overestimating their star power, underestimating Sting's, or both. Sting is a legend, one of the biggest names in the business, and hands down the biggest name ever to not work for Vince. Winning against him is a huge deal. If you think that he should be losing to people lower on the card, I'm sorry, but I flatly disagree.

As for Matt Morgan, I'd agree that TNA should have done more with him, but TNA has consistently failed to do so, and whenever they flirt with him in the main event, he always comes up short. It's not just against Sting, look at his feud with Angle where many assumed Angle'd take the loss, but Matt came up short. But he still benefitted because a hard fought loss against a star of that caliber still gives you some rub. It's certainly not Sting's fault TNA hasn't been willing to pull the trigger and make Morgan a main eventer. If TNA decides to go for it, Sting will absolutely lay down for him.

Again, your Cena comparison is not valid. Yes, there are technically 2 "world" titles, but let's not for a second pretend that is true in fact. The WHC is very clearly a second tier title, and really is no better than the IC title was in the 80s era. And Cena rarely appears on Smackdown, but that is because Smackdown is consider the B show. There are non-Cena feuds going on, but Cena's feud invariably is presented as the most important and the biggest even when logically this should not be the case, and he headlines shows above the champion constantly. None of this is true for Sting. Sting is not always at the forefront of TNA. First of all, he's routinely not on camera at all for months at a time, second of all, when he is on camera, he's half in a managerial position rather than being a full time wrestler. And finally, when he does wrestle he is not presented as the be all end all number one guy.

To suggest that Sting shouldn't be involved in the Aces and Eights angle at all is absurd. Despite his age he remains the biggest name on the roster and (with the possible exception of Angle) the ONLY legend they have that can actually wrestle. Of course he should be involved in the massive us vs them feud, it would be insane for him to not be a part of it.

And the Hernandez comment, that's just ridiculous. If Sting retired tomorrow, Hernandez would be exactly where he is now, tagging with Chavo. Sting is not taking Hernandez' spot, Hernandez is a very good tag team wrestler, but he is by no means a singles star, nor do I think he ever will be.

Sting is not holding anyone down, he's not taking a spot from some more deserving younger talent. There's no one else on the roster who fills the niche Sting fills, and he fills it with heart and passion and does everything he can to put over the company, despite his advancing years. I do not understand your problem with Sting at all.

 

[Lewis617]

Sting didn't start out that way in TNA. There were plenty of times where the spotlight wasn't on him. Until Hogan showed up. And we all know how Hogan is, and didn't believe Sting would ever do like Hogan did, but I guess Hogan convinced him to drink the koolaid and now Sting is like Hogan was in WCW. All the spotlight has to be on him. If he isn't defending the title, he's challenging for it. Respect him for what he has done for the business, but as of late.....respect is sinking like a rock. Don't get me wrong, he's def Hall of Fame worthy, but just like Flair and Hogan, once you get into the HOF, you should ride into the sunset and let that be it, the HOF is your crowning achievement. What more do you need to accomplish?

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The Hogan Koolaid? Really? Come on... Dixie is paying Sting more than most the roster makes in 2 years for his limited schedule. It is sensible he is involved as much as possible for that money. In WCW you had a lot of big name, top dollar draws on that top money, still in "top to good condition" who also had power. TNA don't have that, they have a lot of older guys in declining condition who are there for the name value only. Their core talent is far younger and won't benefit from beating a Sting or Hogan in their current state.

I can see the point that TNA has bungled some pushes, but at the end of the day beating a legend in his 50's isn't going to escalate guys like Morgan to the main event permanently. If they truly are the future, it's almost fallacy to think Sting could beat them. So him failing to do so won't elevate them. Just as a Barrett wouldn't get full benefit of breaking Taker's streak but the pure hatred of the fans and the jealousy of other workers who didn't get the honor. It's why the legend killer gimmick ended, there weren't anymore legends who could go enough to make you believe Randy Orton would have "struggled" against to make it work. In Taker's case now, Punk is the ideal guy to end it as he is the new "guy", it's not about elevating him but about him replacing Taker in those top 3 guys permanently.

Sting deserves all he has achieved and his place is secure onscreen with either company for as long as he wants one. As long as he wrestles he will get title chances, just like Flair did because whatever his age, a match against him still means a lot, it just won't make your career in the way it would have 15 years ago. Guys like Jericho are perfect for putting over and elevating as they are not in physical decline, beating an old man doesn't make a star - so why should the old man lose to someone it won't help or more to the point, why should a company paying top dollar let it happen?

So they use guys like RVD and Angle in that role, who clearly have had success and that name value but can still be competitive enough to make a win over them seem big enough to make a star.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Sting is also the absolute BIGGEST NAME TNA has - You could argue Hogan but since Sting can still put on a good match I give him the edge. So what if he is 54, fans dont want to see their favorites humiliated and beaten by young guys we dont know or care about. That makes us NOT WATCH the show, the exact opposite reason you hire Sting in the 1st place.

Sting certainly does not "hog the spotlight". As other posts have noted he is usually not the centerpiece of the top storyline, hasnt held the title in 19 months, and has losses on his record to top tier talents. He is HBK or Flair in WWE during the last decade. They put over people but also were generally treated well in storylines and match results over all. Imgagine the out cry from fans if those two were solely used as high profile jobbers, often to unestablished younger talent that quite honestly hadnt earned the right to beat them ? WWE ratings would have plummeted in protest.

Finally, who says that you have to beat the older star to get a rub ? I seem to remember Randy Savage getting way over and establishing himself as a legit main eventer with his work in feuds vs Hogan in 1986 and Steamboat in 1987, despite losing virtually every match. People Ric Flair made Sting but remember Sting lost vs Flair in almost every match they had in 1987-88, and in the famous Clash of Champions tilt in 88 Sting only got a draw. Like Savage, Sting did some great work, connecting with the audience, and Flair helped him look good, like a legit title contender, in their matches, even though most of them ended either in submission wins or count out-DQ wins for Flair. Shawn Michaels got huge credibility with the audience after his Survivor Series 92 match vs Brett Hart despite the more established champ Hart winning by submission, Lex Luger became a star through his association with Flair both in The Horsemen (losing more often than winning vs LOD, Dusty Rhodes, Nikita Kolloff) and later as his nemesis (losing a series of count outs vs Flair on the house show circuit, getting jobbed out of the belt at Great Am Bash and pinned in the main event of Starrcade) 1987-88. Meanwhile we can see what Wins over Flair did for Rico & Kenny Dykstra, what beating Triple H did for Shelton Benjamin, and we all remember the great career of Billy Kidman after beating Hogan. It takes charisma and great work to get over and stay over, simply beating someone the fans care about does not equal career elevation.

 

[ABMorales787]

Now i get that Sting is a legend and all that. Huge in WCW and the first person in the TNA hall of fame. He is massively popular and understandably so. However, he is 54 years old and still part of TNA's biggest storylines each year. FIFTY-FOUR.

I am a fan of Sting but I have some problems with him.

The obvious is not putting over of talent. Why should he be there every single year competing for the world title. It is year-round as well and especially at the biggest events of the year. Lockdown or Slammiversry he is there. I wouldn't be surprised if he faces Bully Ray for the world title at this years Slammiversry.

The biggest feuds and story-lines involve him. I'm sure an argument against this is Cena in the WWE but we get breaks from him. Punk is an example for the last 18 months and at least his feuds don't end Raw every single week. Moreover, Cena is in the prime of his career and puts people over in matches.

Sting wins way too much. If you are going to be a fifty-four legend than at least put people over. It is not like the Undertaker who has one match a year. Who has really benefited from a push thanks to Sting?

It is not like TNA don't have the talent in the roster. They do. Bobby Roode, Aries, Styles, Joe, Morgan, Hernandez, Hardy, Anderson and Kurt Angle. That is enough to get through an entire year without having to use Sting. But they do and no-one really cares. In fact, it seems encouraged.

It just seems that the world is full of praise for Sting, and although I like him, I am sick of it. Maybe I am overreacting but I feel that Sting is overused in TNA and it is time he should step aside.

Age means shit in wrestling. Get over it. Mexico's top stars are well into their 50's and people don't give a shit. It's because those old bastards in masks can still flip around the ring and give ace performances. The same case as Sting. He's well into his 50's and can still pull out a decent performance that has the crowd eating out of his hand. It's why Hogan headlined a PPV in 2005, it's why Ric Flair had a major match at Wrestlemania in his 60's, it's how wrestling works.

 

[dman1373]

Sting is also the absolute BIGGEST NAME TNA has - You could argue Hogan but since Sting can still put on a good match I give him the edge. So what if he is 54, fans dont want to see their favorites humiliated and beaten by young guys we dont know or care about. That makes us NOT WATCH the show, the exact opposite reason you hire Sting in the 1st place.

Sting certainly does not "hog the spotlight". As other posts have noted he is usually not the centerpiece of the top storyline, hasnt held the title in 19 months, and has losses on his record to top tier talents. He is HBK or Flair in WWE during the last decade. They put over people but also were generally treated well in storylines and match results over all. Imgagine the out cry from fans if those two were solely used as high profile jobbers, often to unestablished younger talent that quite honestly hadnt earned the right to beat them ? WWE ratings would have plummeted in protest.

Finally, who says that you have to beat the older star to get a rub ? I seem to remember Randy Savage getting way over and establishing himself as a legit main eventer with his work in feuds vs Hogan in 1986 and Steamboat in 1987, despite losing virtually every match. People Ric Flair made Sting but remember Sting lost vs Flair in almost every match they had in 1987-88, and in the famous Clash of Champions tilt in 88 Sting only got a draw. Like Savage, Sting did some great work, connecting with the audience, and Flair helped him look good, like a legit title contender, in their matches, even though most of them ended either in submission wins or count out-DQ wins for Flair. Shawn Michaels got huge credibility with the audience after his Survivor Series 92 match vs Brett Hart despite the more established champ Hart winning by submission, Lex Luger became a star through his association with Flair both in The Horsemen (losing more often than winning vs LOD, Dusty Rhodes, Nikita Kolloff) and later as his nemesis (losing a series of count outs vs Flair on the house show circuit, getting jobbed out of the belt at Great Am Bash and pinned in the main event of Starrcade) 1987-88. Meanwhile we can see what Wins over Flair did for Rico & Kenny Dykstra, what beating Triple H did for Shelton Benjamin, and we all remember the great career of Billy Kidman after beating Hogan. It takes charisma and great work to get over and stay over, simply beating someone the fans care about does not equal career elevation.

sting is not the draw he was 15 years ago. Hell he isn't the draw he was 5 years ago. He hasn't gotten alot of buyrates, ratings, sold that much merchandise. He is not even the top draw in tna. Jeff hardy, kurt angle, and even bully ray now can out draw him. Just look at the highest buyrate in tna history, angle vs joe. Jeff sells way more merch. Hes just another old guy who by putting someone over doesn't mean much anymore since thats what hes there for.

 

[willross]

This is dumb.

Sting is a legend. He still has something to offer. He put Bully Ray over like a million bucks without feuding with him.

Sting puts guys over all the time. He is actually pretty egoless considering the period in which he came up in the business. He still cuts good promos and knows how to hide his age and deficiencies in the ring.

What you don't see and are not acknowledging is his KNOWLEDGE. So many guys on the TNA roster do not know how to tell stories. They just do a bunch of spots and moves that mean nothing and that isnt what wrestling is about. Its not about how many moves you can do, its when you do them, and what you do before and after.

Sting is there cause he knows all that and gets in the ring with these guys and TEACHES them. Whether he wins or loses, those guys he works with leave that match 10x better because they learned so much (and if they didnt, then they aren't any good so they dont matter).

Its such an unintelligent "smark" thing to say Sting is hogging the spotlight, etc, etc. The knowledge he is passing on to these guys in TNA is gonna make them not only great athletes but turn them into logical, psychology filled workers, which a majority of the roster is not.

 

[Papa Pillman]

My problem is only in part due to him not putting people over. He does put some people over but RVD, Anderson and Bobby Roode hardly needed a win over Sting.

Anderson and Roode can't benefit from a rub from Sting? Really?

And who would you have him putting over? Mid carders?

"Boy I wish if Sting was gonna stick around he'd put over Robbie E", is exactly what no one has said. Ever.

The Cena comparison is simply because I feel there is double standards. Cena apparently hoggs all the spotlight but there are two shows a week and two world titles with an extra 2/3 major feuds at any time. The significance of his feuds can generally be overlooked because they are diluted by the rest of the roster.

Except his fueds main event every PPV, so ultimately it is what is presented as most significant.

Sting's cannot. It is ALWAYS at the forefront of TNA's plans.

When was the last time Sting was THE forefront?

Yes, I understand TNA is a smaller company but that means they should be developing quicker.

I agree that the Aces and Eights storyline is not about him but there is no need for him to be there.

So no one in A&8s can use a rub from working with Sting either?

Like I said, there are more deserving guys on the roster than Sting.

Who? and how are the "more deserving"?

Why does Hernandez waste his career teaming with Chavo while Sting headlines each major TNA PPV.

Wait, read that again...

Why does Hernandez waste his career teaming with Chavo while Sting headlines each major TNA PPV.

Are you implying that Hernandez is a better choice to headline a PPV than Sting?

I'd just hope by now that TNA and Sting would have realised that it is not in their best interests to continue with him at the top of the major cards each year.

Well he wasn't at the "top" of the Lockdown card, or the BFG card, or any PPV in the last 2 years aside from Slammiversary last year where he did the job to Roode in a non-title match.

Basically none of the criticism you have for Sting holds water. He is not treated as a Cena-like entity. He does not routinely main event PPVs. His programs are not inflated to seem bigger than the other storylines. He is still a very good worker for his age. He puts people over on a regular basis. No one inside the business says a bad word about him. He takes time off to keep in shape so that when he is around he can perform well and work a regular schedule. Unlike most his age he still works tv matches consistently, instead of just being built up for a few PPV fueds a year. etc. etc. etc.

The OP is a hater. That is what has been made most clear here.

 

[Judah's Lion]

I am a fan of Sting but I have some problems with him.

The obvious is not putting over of talent. Why should he be there every single year competing for the world title. It is year-round as well and especially at the biggest events of the year. Lockdown or Slammiversry he is there. I wouldn't be surprised if he faces Bully Ray for the world title at this years Slammiversry.

The biggest feuds and story-lines involve him. I'm sure an argument against this is Cena in the WWE but we get breaks from him. Punk is an example for the last 18 months and at least his feuds don't end Raw every single week. Moreover, Cena is in the prime of his career and puts people over in matches.

It is not like TNA don't have the talent in the roster. They do. Bobby Roode, Aries, Styles, Joe, Morgan, Hernandez, Hardy, Anderson and Kurt Angle. That is enough to get through an entire year without having to use Sting. But they do and no-one really cares. In fact, it seems encouraged.

Slammiversary 10, 11 and 12 he was in world title matches. In my opinion that is diabolic that he is continued to get he biggest spot at the ppv each year. Fair enough he lost those matches but enough is enough.

4 of the last 7 Bound For Glory's he has been in a world title match. He has also faced Hogan and the Aces of Eights. If that is Cena than people are crying over the lack of imagination. The product being boring and stale. However, this is a 54 year old working on a two-hour a week show with one world title. It seems he is hogging all the spotlight.

almost replied to this thread last night, but wanted to really think about my response before posting.

for starters, and with all due respect, i find these posts (i combined two from the OP above) to be contradictory. keeping in mind that i'm a fan of both Sting and Cena, i'll bullet point my thoughts...

1. i thought Bound for Glory was the biggest TNA ppv of the year. if that's the case, Sting was not in the World Title picture or main event slot for the last 2 years. Cena, on the other hand, has been in 8 of the last 9 Manias in either a World Title match and/or main event slot. he's won all but 3, losing twice to the Rock. i count the Rock, not Miz, as the winner of 27.

2. Punk, not Cena, held the World Title for over a year and Cena has not held the World Title for over a year and a half. two true points. however, look at Punk's most recent run. hardly ever in the main event even though he was champ. Cena was in the main event for the majority of the year. and when Punk was in the main event, it was almost always when he was against Cena or lately the Rock.

3. WWE also has a very talented roster. yet, Cena seems to be in the spotlight consistently. and the outcomes of his matches are also consistent: winning cleanly via pinfall or submission, or losing due to some sorta fluke involving disqualification, interference, etc. exception being the Rock at Mania.

4. i highlighted two sentences in red that were originally posted by the OP. sentence one says Sting never puts anyone over and sentence two says Sting loses his matches. seems like that means he's putting people over.

5. Sting is 54. fact. Sting is not the only person to wrestle to said age or well beyond. Hogan, Flair, Funk, etc. Sting is not in the spotlight. in TNA, that is strictly reserved for Hogan at present. he is a part of the puzzle, much as Flair was in his last WWE run which ended his active wrestling career at Mania 24 against HBK. Flair, though no young spring chicken, was still wrestling, putting over young talent and adding veteran experience to the show without stealing the spotlight. he had a piece of the pie, but was not selfish with it. same with Sting. both class acts.

in summary, i think Sting adds more positive value than not. same goes for Cena in WWE if we wanna keep the comparison going.

 

[enviousdominous]

You really don't get the concept of "putting over" if you think that Sting puts people over less than John Cena.

Sting is extremely humble for a top tier performer. He's allowed clean wins to Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan and Bret Hart. He allows spots in matches with the younger talent that make that younger talent look good, putting them over in other words.

John Cena will put you over only if he's winning the match handily. The most recent person he lost clean to was Randy Orton back in 2009. Every loss after that has been a fluke, mainly because taking a clean loss to anybody would be putting then over.

While Sting has been in the spotlight, he hasn't hogged the main event like Cena has. When Punk was defending his championship on PPV, the main event would be John Cena vs John Laurinitis.

I find Sting to be a thousand times more refreshing in the ring and on the mic as I find John Cena to be. At least Sting makes an effort to reinvent himself in some way from time to time, John Cena is the same dork he was in 2004 after he rapped about a tuna can to Stephanie.


Posted from Wrestlezone.com App for Android

 

[JASONIGHTMARE]

The fact that wrestling fans will always find some reason to complain about. You can't compare john semen to Steve Borden. Sting puts guys over all the time compared to cena.cena wants special treatment, a loss to him means the end of the world to him. John is selfish, egotistical, careless, heartless and is not a true sportsman. It's all profitship for him unlike sting who is a true sportsman in my eyes and rest of the wrestling fan's eyes. Money is not an issue for Steve. Let me remind you all he declined wwes Disney stars for lotsa money cause he did it for Sportsmanship not profitship. Jc will continue to be the goofy star of wwe Disney superstars u

 

[New Hot Fed]

I think Sting should remain super-strong and sometime he could put someone over, I don't mind it, if it's the right circonstances. He did put AJ Styles over at BFG 2009 and remember he mad a speach and it was almost over for him.

Now my main problem is the whole presentation of Sting. Not only he's not always convincing outthere, he gets winded and beat-up a lot but always going in his match with t-shirts make him look like he is half-assing things. Secondly, his whole trying to please Hogan character is annoying or trying to convert guys, trying to see the good in guys, he comes off most of the time like an old lady whining. Like he did with Bully recently. I just wish he was this silent badass that would come in set down the law, sometime having matchs but not being bogged by stuff. And no more t-shirts please. After all this talks about Dixie always convinving him to stay and TNA needing him, I think most of the time they've used him badly. It could be done better, Sting could be better for TNA as a whole.

That's my 2 cents.

 

[Dyscord]

The most recent person he lost clean to was Randy Orton back in 2009. Every loss after that has been a fluke, mainly because taking a clean loss to anybody would be putting then over.

He lost clean to Rock at last year's Mania. But yeah, Cena rarely loses clean. Sting, on the other hand, has lost cleanly plenty of times.

I find this thread amusing though. I dunno how anyone can say that Sting is hogging the spotlight when he hasn't had the world title in almost two years. As opposed to Cena, whose feuds were made to be bigger than the title itself. I honestly can't say that Sting has ever done that.

 

[MCMG]

Are you implying that Hernandez is a better choice to headline a PPV than Sting?


Well he wasn't at the "top" of the Lockdown card, or the BFG card, or any PPV in the last 2 years aside from Slammiversary last year where he did the job to Roode in a non-title match.

Basically none of the criticism you have for Sting holds water. He is not treated as a Cena-like entity. He does not routinely main event PPVs. His programs are not inflated to seem bigger than the other storylines. He is still a very good worker for his age. He puts people over on a regular basis. No one inside the business says a bad word about him. He takes time off to keep in shape so that when he is around he can perform well and work a regular schedule. Unlike most his age he still works tv matches consistently, instead of just being built up for a few PPV fueds a year. etc. etc. etc.

The OP is a hater. That is what has been made most clear here.

Slammeversary, Bound for Glory and Lockdown. Sting has been in a world title match or involved in the big-name feud in each card for his whole TNA career. Literally two or three exceptions in 6/7 years of his TNA career. Surely its time to move on? Is Sting the way forward.

I can't see how TNA are massively benefiting from this. Excuse my ignorance, but at this moment is Sting such a massive draw. I get he is a legend of the business and, to an extent I am a fan of Sting but I just don't see it. Is he bringing in buy-rates like crazy?

Moreover, in all that time surely TNA could have built some major stars. Hence my Hernandez comment. I'm not saying that Hernandez is better than Sting but a spot in the main event of the major ppvs (or at least at the top of the card) for the last few years would at least help make him a star. Same applies for others, Hernandez was merely an example.

 

[Papa Pillman]

Slammeversary, Bound for Glory and Lockdown. Sting has been in a world title match or involved in the big-name feud in each card for his whole TNA career. Literally two or three exceptions in 6/7 years of his TNA career. Surely its time to move on? Is Sting the way forward.

I get where it is that you're coming from. But I think that your criticism is dated. If you were making this argument two or three years ago it would hold more water. Hell, you could even have made a similar argument as it pertained to Kurt Angle. But at this point Sting, and Kurt as well, are no longer taking up spots in the main events of PPVs. Each has moved a little down the card and shifted their primary focuses from being the ones carrying the company to being the ones helping give rubs to guys that will be the main players when they are gone. Look at the last year and a half and you don't need an enitre hand to count the number of times that Sting has main evented any PPV, not just the major ones that remain.

I can't see how TNA are massively benefiting from this. Excuse my ignorance, but at this moment is Sting such a massive draw. I get he is a legend of the business and, to an extent I am a fan of Sting but I just don't see it. Is he bringing in buy-rates like crazy?

Again a criticism that would have been valid when the cards were being built around Sting. Building one or two PPV main event spots a year for a guy of Sting's caliber who can still go is not an aggregious mistake. He is still the biggest and most recognizable star they have. Now that Sting is mostly working the upper mid-card, can he really be a hindrance to the card? At that point his presence can only help to prop up some non-world title related angles, and give the guys he working against the chance to work with one of the top five or six guys of the last 25 years.

Moreover, in all that time surely TNA could have built some major stars. Hence my Hernandez comment. I'm not saying that Hernandez is better than Sting but a spot in the main event of the major ppvs (or at least at the top of the card) for the last few years would at least help make him a star. Same applies for others, Hernandez was merely an example.

But I think they have built stars as best they can for a company their size. When Sting and Angle were a bit younger and regularly main eventing they were helping to build the likes of AJ and Joe into stars. AJ and Joe became about as big as they could get considering the relative exposure of TNA.

And more recently they have started to create more stars to be the guys once Kurt and Sting are gone. Guys like Aries who was in and out of the company and never more then a midcard X-division guy has become a main event talent in his latest run. And also Bobby Roode, people had annointed Bobby a future world champion for years, but he bided his time for his chance, and the established guys like Kurt, Sting, and even AJ and Jeff Hardy all did their parts to help to get Bobby into the position he finally deserved to reach. Those two are two more recent examples of guys whose only national exposure has ever been through TNA, yet by TNA standards they are over main event level workers. Alot of that is due to rubs from more established main eventers who made their names in larger companies.

As for the Hernandez example, the guy simply is no where near main event level. And no amount of trying to force into the main event is going to change that. The guys who are main event caliber have, and will continue to, get a chance to prove it. Hernandez simply is not one of those guys. Forcing a guy into the main event just to see of he sticks even though he doesn't belong there is not a smart strategy. TNA has made this same mistake a couple of times with Matt Morgan already. Morgan has been given multiple chances to be a main event guy, but he has never stuck there, that is simply because he not talented enough or interesting enough to be a consistent main eventer.