WWE General Complaints Thread

[MizMark11]

I wanted some legends to show up, but I never really expected it. As said before, WWE never said that they'd have legends showing up all over the place. Instead they would say that last night is the 20th anniversary and they played clips from the past 20 years. That's all that needed to be done. Think of the past times when IWC members would get pissed and say that the legends took up too much time from the young guys. That didn't happen tonight.

Tonight we actually got advancements in storylines. Rhodes Scholars and Hell No, Ryback's crew and the Shield, ADR and Big Show, CM Punk and the Rock. Yes, Flair/Miz was painful to watch but at least we got some advancement in Miz/Cesaro and it has been said that the two of them have been putting on some great matches at live events. Yes, Clay vs Punk wasn't a great match, but it made sense. Clay mentioned Punk on Twitter last week and was not happy that he mentioned him and that translated into tonight's show pretty well. Also I was disappointed that Ziggler lost to Cena, but it was a great match and Ziggler doesn't look that bad because AJ and Langston basically cost him the match. I do believe that Ziggler will beat Cena clean soon and that will be a memorable moment. Don't forget, Wade also beat Orton clean which was good to see too. Plus the Divas title changed.

There's obviously two ways to judge this Raw. You can be the person who was looking forward to legends and got disappointed or you can be someone who went in with no expectations, thus getting more out of Raw. I'm the latter and I didn't think of Raw to be that bad.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I thought it was a pretty good show. What made the show was the last hour. Ziggler and Cena put on a ppv quality match on Raw and The Rock's spot was typical rock gold. I was suprised at first that his songs weren't geared towards Punk, but afterwords found it to be much better that he saved a physical altercation for Punk. Makes his upcoming match with Punk all the better. Also throw in the nice promo between Miz and Flair with Cesaro at the end and the opening to the show with all the Raw intros and it was enough for me.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

It was a decent RAW at best but for what it was supposed to be, it sucked. They did hype the show. Maybe not to the months of commercial hype that the 1000 episode got but they still advertised for it more than a usual RAW. Like another guy said, they showed all these legends in the commercial as to hint that there would be special appearances by some of them. They weren't showing legends just to say, "Look at all the guys who used to be full time!". The whole show came off as desperate to justify itself. And each time there was an introduction for someone, it felt like all the anticipation was for Stone Cold. But honestly, I'm not sure that even he could have saved last night from the pointlessness.

The highlights of last night were The Rock's old school backstage segment with Foley and The Rock's song to Vickie. Everything else was pretty much normal or bland. Including MizTV with the Nature Boy. A decent RAW buck a lackluster anniversary show.

 

[Con T.]

Oh, good fucking grief.

If anything its Wrestlezone and other such sites for pushing all these legends turning up WWE in no way advertised such things.

Let me show you a little quote from last week's edition of The Wrestling Observer;

Nobody was advertised on 1/14 for the 20th anniversary Raw in Houston other than Rock being back. Well, that and the return of Dr. Shelby.

And, might I continue?

Bret Hart was contacted and was willing to come if there was a reason to come. Basically he didn’t want his being on the show to be trivialized and him being one of two dozen guys and just doing a cameo role. His feeling is if he’s going to be on TV, there should be a good storyline reason and a good role and why bother coming in for a quick cameo.

Now, doesn't this logic make more sense than expecting all of these massive stars to come back, to do some awkward cameo that has no purpose other than to shove some faces on television? Remember Raw 1,000, and what they had Bret Hart doing for that night?

Oh yeah... I remember...

[YOUTUBE]zqe8P-mclPs[/YOUTUBE]

You really think Bret Hart, or anyone else, wanted to be brought back to just do that? Seriously, what can Shawn and Taker do that makes sense, with where WWE is going for the next two weeks?

Oh yeah, that's right; nothing. And with that in mind, allow me to show you Dave Meltzer's closing quote of that paragraph;

But it blows my mind if any really big names are there and Shelby’s return is the only one they promote.

So when you talk about other such sites, seriously consider your words, and blame more specifically the second hand reports that cite the Wrestling Observer and PWInsider (all of which have been misquoted at some point by Wrestlezone, at some juncture) incorrectly. I know you never said Wrestling Observer, but that's going to be the one everyone rushes to say was wrong.

I will say however I sincerely hope Stone Cold starts to get the abuse Rock gets now. I know Rock left for 7 years and didn't want to associated with wrestling BUT at least he's making up for that. He's turned up a lot in the last couple of years now especially given his schedule. Where's the abuse for Austin not showing up? Not at Raw 1000 or the 20th anniversary. I remember people being very disappointed Rock didn't show for the 15th anniversary.

I'm not really pissed at Vince and WWE for treating the fans like idiots and giving us a crapy raw for the 20th anniversary. But im more pissed with Austin. He basically made the Attitude Era and brought WWE to the highest point. So he needs to the one to show up. It's his hometown for goodness sake. He missed the 1000th show due to an injury, so now that he has said hes publicly fit again, he could of at least appeared here. But he failed to. Again.

Good point chris. I think this may be the point where fans start treating Austin differently. Where is his commitment? I would get if he only lasted a few years or was a jobber at mid card level but this is stone cold steve austin. The number 1 guy who carried the WWF into and through the Attitude era. The WWE made him into a star. We the fans made him into who he is.

Austin is no where to be seen again.... I checked his twitter and people are bombarding him with questions on if he even got asked to appear last night but he hasn't commented on any as yet.

I think the real kick in the teeth was that he made a statement about being unfit to attend the 1000th Anniversary show but he would love to do something when he was better to make up for it. Well he is back to fitness now as he has stated. Last night, being in his HOMETOWN of Texas and it being the 20th Anniversary of RAW...It was the time to do it and look at the effort....

Austin doesn't owe any of you anything.

Stop acting as though you're entitled to anything from Steve Austin. Using the, "If people shit on The Rock, they should also shit on Austin" is even more ******ed. You're a jackass if you think you're entitled to an appearance from The Rock, and you're still a jackass if you think you're entitled to an appearance from Steve Austin. Can anyone tell me what you can do with Steve Austin that makes sense, and pushes what WWE is pushing to the Royal Rumble?

Are you going to have him do a segment with Punk? Why would you? After all, he is working with The Rock; why would you try to overshadow the Rock/Punk angle by randomly throwing in Austin?

Cena/Ziggler? Again, where's your logic?

The Shield? Well, they had Mick Foley, who by the way they were announcing was going into the Hall of Fame, so they needed him, to do that little angle. With The Shield, there's likely two things that can happen;

1. The Shield comes down, and gets beat up by Steve Austin. Austin isn't going to run like Mick Foley did last night; that isn't his character. So Steve waits in the ring, and gets physical with The Shield, which ends with him beating them up, and killing off the rising heel faction.

2. The Shield comes down, and beats up Steve Austin. Fine, if you can guarantee me that Austin is in shape to take a beating, which there is none. No one here knows the status of Steve Austin's knee, or his health; stop pretending like you do.

There is literally no way to bring Austin in, and make sense out of it. And I'm sure Steve saw this, concluded he wouldn't be needed or that creative had nothing for him, and decided it was meaningless to come. The last couple of times Steve Austin has come back, he's been more and more marginalized; fuck off if you actually believe you are owed a Steve Austin appearance.

The show was awful.

Wrestlezone has lost all credibility.

No undertaker,
No HBK
NO Austin
No Lesnar
No Batista
No goldberg
No HHH
No Y2J
No Evoultion Reniuon
No... other legends.

I'm sorry, did the WWE promote any of those names?

No?

Then you're probably a ****** for believing they'd show up.

You all don't get it
It wasn't necessary
To have these guys back

 

[JGlass]

Jesus dude that is a bit melodramatic. No Ziggler should not win every match. But Cena has won cleanly two weeks in a row.

HOLY SHIT! A FACE HAS WON CLEANLY TWO WEEKS IN A ROW! WHAT THE FUCK KIND OF WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN WHERE THE BIGGEST NAME IN PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING CAN WIN A MATCH CLEANLY TWO WEEKS IN A ROW?!

You sound like a grade A moron with that kind of crap.

In what world is that a rub? How is that a feud? Last week Ziggler blasted him with all his finishers and had help, no dice. One AA and it was all over. That is stupid, no matter how you look at it.

It's a rub because it makes Ziggler relevant. Even with that Money in the Bank briefcase Ziggler has struggled to stay in the eye of the fans without all sorts of crazy stories and gimmicks surrounding him.

And you act as if there's some sort of shame in losing to Cena. You're losing to the biggest name in professional wrestling in the entire world. It would be like losing to Steve Austin in 1999 or Hulk Hogan in 1989 or Lou Thesz in 1949. If you think outside of kayfabe for a moment you'll notice that Dolph Ziggler is privileged enough to be made to look great by John Cena by putting on some highly entertaining matches with him. That's the type of thing that won't go unnoticed by the audience.

What good does it do when Cena rolls through the competition like me through a buffet spread? It is the same thing over and over: Cena loses only through cheating but often dominates the feuds, getting a lot more wins on TV and PPV. Kicking their ass during promos or after matches.

Are you seriously complaining about time tested practices in professional wrestling that have been used to sell tickets since the early 20th century?

Ziggler should not win every match. But he is young and Cena is established. Ziggler has the MitB case too. So let's say they have a match at the Rumble and Ziggler wins cleanly, how would that hurt Cena? Then Ziggler goes on and cashes in at Elimination Chamber or even better, he chooses to cash in at WM beating Big Show cleanly, which is what Show should be doing. Putting guys over.

Fantasy booking is fun. I've developed a plan that brings Funaki back to the WWE and builds him up to be the number one contender for the WWE Championship, and he wins it after he hits CM Punk with a 5 Finger Death Punch.

Why does John Cena beat Ziggler cleanly? Because the overwhelming majority of fans aren't tuning in to watch Dolph Ziggler pin John Cena; they're spending their Monday night watching Raw because they want to see John Cena win. It's the same reason people wanted to watch Hogan in the 80s and Austin in the 90s.

One last thing: When was the last time Cena ever gave anyone a rub? When was the last time he had a quality feud that did not suck ball? Okay, I will admit that he and Rock had some moments and he and Punk back in 2011.

Last night when he was in the ring with Dolph Ziggler, making him look like he could actually wrestle.

 

[Mustang Sally]

I guess my issue with it is that Cena does it over and over and over. The same shit for nearly a decade. Longer than Hogan.

Sure, but if Hogan had bothered to stick around with the company that made him into a household name, he would still be doing the "same shit" after almost 30 years. A part of the pre-determined world of pro wrestling often includes the genuine American hero; the guy who can power out of almost anything and emerge as the man who saves the day..... the man who does it for us, Mom, apple pie & Santa Claus.

Cena is the modern-day successor to Hogan. You could make an argument for guys like the Rock and Steve Austin, but they were anti-heroes: technically, heels who were portraying faces. Hogan was all hero: so is Cena. (To be fair; many folks grew tired of Hogan's act, too. It's part and parcel of playing a bigger-than-life role on a grand stage).

Okay, so many of the folks on this forum and in the wrestling-watching public have decided to "hate" Cena.....and I always wonder whether they hate the character as drawn by Creative or if they hate the man who is portraying the wrestler. In fact, I also wonder if many fans themselves realize the difference between the two.

For all the criticism Cena gets, he's not a world beater.....it's not as if he never loses: far from it. It's not as if he always wins against insurmountable odds; when chased by 7 members of Nexus, he let discretion be the better part of valor and fled the ring. I don't know about you, but I admired him even more when he did that; it was realistic. Can you imagine Hulk Hogan allowing management to portray him as running from anyone? Not a chance.

Give me Cena. This is what he does.....and he does it better than anyone.

*******

One more possibility: I still think WWE sees Dolph Ziggler as a monster star of the (near) future. It could be he's being asked to sacrifice himself now in order to bring about an overwhelming push that will include winning and losing the heavyweight championship for years to come. Whether we like it or not (I don't) I believe the company sees him as the man who will take WWE into the next decade.....and that's the reason he appears on Raw and Smackdown both, week after week, month after month. It could be they're setting the stage for something huge for Dolph.

I wouldn't mind being wrong on that one.

 

[Headman]

I am not really sure what you are trying to argue. Essentially you think that Cena should remain on top. And that Ziggler's fanbase is smaller. Um, does that matter? And I would argue that Cena has a hell of a lot more detractors than Ziggler. Ziggler has been in the WWE for a few years and so when is it time for him to get his push? five or ten more years? Cena was champ within a year or two. So why not Ziggler? He is far more talented than Cena.

I just don't get how you can be interested in maintaining the status-quo. Ziggler cannot be elevated without WWE giving him wins. He is already over as a heel and all he needs is that one big win. Why would it hurt for Cena to put him over? I guess I cannot fathom why you think he shouldn't.

Remember DDP back in 97? WCW made him the day he Diamond Cutted Hall and took out Nash. It was that simple. Then they had him feud with Savage and Savage and he worked their asses off. DDP was made. It is that easy. But WWE will give someone a mini-push and then pull the rug out from someone. The fans are conditioned to respond the way they do because heels are treated as second class and the midcard is essentially a glass ceiling. They know that Ziggler won't go over....

Don't be a lamb dude. WWE is stale as they do the same thing over and over and will not change until the fans demand it. Sure some it is good but overall they could do so much more.

And you have to be lying about the Lesnar feud. It was three weeks. They jobbed Lesnar and Cena no-sold everything. It was a travesty and sums up all that is wrong right now.

That's just silly. Change for the sake of change equals disaster. I'm not against someone replacing Cena if they're actually up to the task, but Ziggler isn't. You say he's got fewer detractors. Yes in the way that the Buffalo Bills have fewer detractors than the New England Patriots. Or that Liberia has to the United States. You're just making the same tired anti-Cena argument and making the assumption that you speak for every one. And your this post leads me to believe you really do think Ziggler is the guy to replace Cena, which is also silly. And calling me a lamb is probably the most condescending thing you've said during our dialogue. You once again assume that everyone shares your opinion and by me having mine I somehow stand in the way of what you want.

And the Lesnar thing. More was accomplished in three weeks than the first 8 months of CM Punk's WWE title reign. You once again assume that your opinion is the prevailing one. A running theme with you it seems.


On a funnier note the poll at the top proves that as a whole the WZ community is a bunch of complainers.

 

[motleyfan]

Is anyone gonna complain about last nights raw not just the roster? Talk about off topic. I was upset because all week wrestlezone hyped that there were gonna be so many legends and it was gonna be huge but it felt like any other raw with some old clips thrown in

 

[JGlass]

Is anyone gonna complain about last nights raw not just the roster? Talk about off topic. I was upset because all week wrestlezone hyped that there were gonna be so many legends and it was gonna be huge but it felt like any other raw with some old clips thrown in

Well whose fault is that? The WWE's for not doing what some random online wrestling news site said they would or you for believing what you read on the internet?

WWE never promised us anything other than the fact that they would recognize it was the 20th Anniversary, which they did. Sure, it wasn't chock full of fanfare like Raw 1000 was, but they did have a few special moments and put on an overall solid show.

 

[dukes07]

HOLY SHIT! A FACE HAS WON CLEANLY TWO WEEKS IN A ROW! WHAT THE FUCK KIND OF WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN WHERE THE BIGGEST NAME IN PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING CAN WIN A MATCH CLEANLY TWO WEEKS IN A ROW?!

You sound like a grade A moron with that kind of crap.



It's a rub because it makes Ziggler relevant. Even with that Money in the Bank briefcase Ziggler has struggled to stay in the eye of the fans without all sorts of crazy stories and gimmicks surrounding him.

And you act as if there's some sort of shame in losing to Cena. You're losing to the biggest name in professional wrestling in the entire world. It would be like losing to Steve Austin in 1999 or Hulk Hogan in 1989 or Lou Thesz in 1949. If you think outside of kayfabe for a moment you'll notice that Dolph Ziggler is privileged enough to be made to look great by John Cena by putting on some highly entertaining matches with him. That's the type of thing that won't go unnoticed by the audience.



Are you seriously complaining about time tested practices in professional wrestling that have been used to sell tickets since the early 20th century?



Fantasy booking is fun. I've developed a plan that brings Funaki back to the WWE and builds him up to be the number one contender for the WWE Championship, and he wins it after he hits CM Punk with a 5 Finger Death Punch.

Why does John Cena beat Ziggler cleanly? Because the overwhelming majority of fans aren't tuning in to watch Dolph Ziggler pin John Cena; they're spending their Monday night watching Raw because they want to see John Cena win. It's the same reason people wanted to watch Hogan in the 80s and Austin in the 90s.



Last night when he was in the ring with Dolph Ziggler, making him look like he could actually wrestle.

Whoa, so now we are resorting to name calling because I don't prescribe to your viewpoint. I had a feeling it would come to this: A passive aggressive "bad-ass." So it is clear that your head is far up Cena's ass. You may be John Cena himself or his mother. I am not sure why are so angry, maybe you need to get laid or drunk or both.

Anyway, I leave will it at this: Cena cannot wrestle. He is booed more often than not. He is shoved down our throats. And he wins far too often. He no-sells everything. His feuds suck ass. Ziggler is far superior than he is and he is the one that it made it look like Cena can wrestle.

But then again I cannot take you seriously when you it is obvious you know shit about booking and wrestling in general, gushing about Cena's two clean wins in a row and then forgetting about all the other feuds and pushes short-circuited by him. And it is not a time tested practice for heels to be booked as *****es. It is a WWE practice. And to compare Cena to Austin and even Hogan proves you drank the Kool-Aid. So go on back to your Cena posters and ejaculate.

 

[dukes07]

Sure, but if Hogan had bothered to stick around with the company that made him into a household name, he would still be doing the "same shit" after almost 30 years. A part of the pre-determined world of pro wrestling often includes the genuine American hero; the guy who can power out of almost anything and emerge as the man who saves the day..... the man who does it for us, Mom, apple pie & Santa Claus.

Cena is the modern-day successor to Hogan. You could make an argument for guys like the Rock and Steve Austin, but they were anti-heroes: technically, heels who were portraying faces. Hogan was all hero: so is Cena. (To be fair; many folks grew tired of Hogan's act, too. It's part and parcel of playing a bigger-than-life role on a grand stage).

Okay, so many of the folks on this forum and in the wrestling-watching public have decided to "hate" Cena.....and I always wonder whether they hate the character as drawn by Creative or if they hate the man who is portraying the wrestler. In fact, I also wonder if many fans themselves realize the difference between the two.

For all the criticism Cena gets, he's not a world beater.....it's not as if he never loses: far from it. It's not as if he always wins against insurmountable odds; when chased by 7 members of Nexus, he let discretion be the better part of valor and fled the ring. I don't know about you, but I admired him even more when he did that; it was realistic. Can you imagine Hulk Hogan allowing management to portray him as running from anyone? Not a chance.

Give me Cena. This is what he does.....and he does it better than anyone.

*******

One more possibility: I still think WWE sees Dolph Ziggler as a monster star of the (near) future. It could be he's being asked to sacrifice himself now in order to bring about an overwhelming push that will include winning and losing the heavyweight championship for years to come. Whether we like it or not (I don't) I believe the company sees him as the man who will take WWE into the next decade.....and that's the reason he appears on Raw and Smackdown both, week after week, month after month. It could be they're setting the stage for something huge for Dolph.

I wouldn't mind being wrong on that one.

I will keep this short and sweet but when you say that Cena is not a world beater that is patently false. He beat three members of Nexus a minute after being DDT'd on the concrete. Hogan sold. He looked like he was in trouble. He would get beaten from pillar to post and then Hulk Up, pulling the victory out of certain defeat. Cena does no such thing. He is hit by every finisher in the book and then wins....

One last example: Batista. Sure Batista was leaving but Cena beat him on three straight PPV's. Three. You knew Cena was going to win every time and he did. Why not have Batista win one cleanly and one by cheating or win both by cheating and then Cena, right when you think he cannot win, comes back one last time and wins.

 

[Con T.]

Whoa, so now we are resorting to name calling because I don't prescribe to your viewpoint. I had a feeling it would come to this: A passive aggressive "bad-ass." So it is clear that your head is far up Cena's ass. You may be John Cena himself or his mother. I am not sure why are so angry, maybe you need to get laid or drunk or both.

Subscribe. You aren't in any position to prescribe anything; if you managed to obtain a medical degree, it says a lot more about our health care system than I'd like to imagine.

Anyway, I leave will it at this: Cena cannot wrestle. He is booed more often than not. He is shoved down our throats. And he wins far too often. He no-sells everything. His feuds suck ass. Ziggler is far superior than he is and he is the one that it made it look like Cena can wrestle

Then tell me this; why is that Cena main evented the highest grossing Wrestlemania of all time just last year, when Dolph Ziggler was in a throwaway mid card match?

All of what you say is completely subjective; the only objective thing out there is that Cena draws, and Ziggler never has

But then again I cannot take you seriously when you it is obvious you know shit about booking and wrestling in general, gushing about Cena's two clean wins in a row and then forgetting about all the other feuds and pushes short-circuited by him. And it is not a time tested practice for heels to be booked as *****es. It is a WWE practice. And to compare Cena to Austin and even Hogan proves you drank the Kool-Aid. So go on back to your Cena posters and ejaculate.

Please, explain to me these feuds and pushes Cena has short circuited? I'm very curious, because to me, it seems like you only get elevated when you feud with Cena

 

[dukes07]

Subscribe. You aren't in any position to prescribe anything; if you managed to obtain a medical degree, it says a lot more about our health care system than I'd like to imagine.



Then tell me this; why is that Cena main evented the highest grossing Wrestlemania of all time just last year, when Dolph Ziggler was in a throwaway mid card match?

All of what you say is completely subjective; the only objective thing out there is that Cena draws, and Ziggler never has




Please, explain to me these feuds and pushes Cena has short circuited? I'm very curious, because to me, it seems like you only get elevated when you feud with Cena

Well, thanks for checking up on my grammar. But look up the synonyms of the word I used and it actually works.

As for pushes/feuds that have been short-circuited due to Cena. You are correct, I just started watching again in 2010. My wording there was poor. I meant to say feuds he has dominated, such as Umaga, besting his undefeated streak before I started watching again. Batista, as I discussed above. Nexus was really short-changed. As was his "firing" when he was gone for a week and then kicked the shit out of Wade Barrett. As for being elevated by Cena? Nexus died, Barrett got de-pushed. It took HHH's love to get Sheamus another push as he was relegated to the midcard. Umaga, disappeared and then died.

As for WrestleMania: Each year the numbers are big. I don't believe the buyrates are bigger than they were in the 80s and Attitude Era but they are making big bucks due to the great marketing.

My issue and I have stated over and over that I am subjective. Every opinion is subjective is that, but anyway let me get to my point: Cena should be used here and there to give a guy a big boost. Why not prepare for the future? Why not change things up a bit? If you go back and read my examples with DDP and now another, HHH, Foley helped make him. HHH became legit after beating Foley two or three times in a row. Cena has nothing to gain. He has hit his peak and is probably on the decline, and to say that he was responsible for the money brought in for WM is silly, but no doubt he was a part of it....so, use Cena to make Ziggler. Why not? I don't get why wrestling fans would not want that. It would not hurt Cena and now you have a monster heel, kicking ass and taking names. A legit threat that can win anywhere, anytime. Meanwhile, Cena moves on to the next feud and no harm no foul...And even better, you can set up something else a year or two from now, to play off it, continue the feud. Now WWE has two moneymakers and maybe they can headline a WM. I just dislike the fact that the WWE does the same shit over and over for the most part, and so I put my money where my mouth is and I have watched a handful of shows since Summer.

 

[Con T.]

Well, thanks for checking up on my grammar. But look up the synonyms of the word I used and it actually works.

Prescribe; order, enjoin, recommend. You're not saying you can do any of these things; what you're saying is you can't agree to it.

As for pushes/feuds that have been short-circuited due to Cena. You are correct, I just started watching again in 2010. My wording there was poor.

Well, there we go. There's something there, and let's see what point you're going with here.

I meant to say feuds he has dominated, such as Umaga, besting his undefeated streak before I started watching again.

Umaga was extremely one dimensional; he was a one shot opponent, who you could probably get two or three main events out of, at best.

Batista, as I discussed above.

You've already mentioned that Batista was leaving anyway, so what benefit does it serve for Batista to beat Cena.

Also, the feud started out with Batista destroying Cena, and one of the points to this feud was that Cena had never beaten Batista before.

Nexus was really short-changed. As was his "firing" when he was gone for a week and then kicked the shit out of Wade Barrett.

Which is somewhat of a mute point, when you consider that without Cena, Nexus doesn't get nearly as over as it did to begin with. But, the problem with Nexus was that there was that, just like Umaga, there's only so much you can do with the invading faction, especially with all of the bad luck it endured, and the when you consider that most of the Nexus, at least on their own merits, weren't good enough.

I grant you this; Summerslam was a fairly big letdown. But again, aside from that night, Cena gave plenty to the Nexus. The problem was twofold;

1. Nexus was booked rather poorly after Summerslam

2. Most of the talent in the Nexus weren't all that talented; Slater was probably the best worker, then Gabriel, but after that, who could really carry their own feud at that time?

As for being elevated by Cena? Nexus died, Barrett got de-pushed. It took HHH's love to get Sheamus another push as he was relegated to the midcard. Umaga, disappeared and then died.

Again, you're dealing with two issues;

1. How you book the guy feuding with Cena after the Cena feud.

2. Sheamus and The Nexus in particular are guys that weren't exactly ready for the push they got.

You know who was ready for the push he got, and was booked relatively well after his feud with Cena? CM Punk. And look what that did for his career. Now, of course, you can say Punk did a lot to get himself over, but every good feud needs for wrestlers to play off one another.

As for WrestleMania: Each year the numbers are big. I don't believe the buyrates are bigger than they were in the 80s and Attitude Era but they are making big bucks due to the great marketing.

Which is true, but why did this Wrestlemania do so damn well, when compared to others?

My issue and I have stated over and over that I am subjective. Every opinion is subjective is that, but anyway let me get to my point:

Again, fair, but there's objective fact to prove people still care about Cena.

Cena should be used here and there to give a guy a big boost. Why not prepare for the future? Why not change things up a bit? If you go back and read my examples with DDP and now another, HHH, Foley helped make him. HHH became legit after beating Foley two or three times in a row.

Foley was also not the top draw in the company, so you weren't losing much by having him lose. With what you're proposing, it'd be more analogous to Rock being brought in to make Triple H.

Of course, I get what you're saying, but you're wrong if you think Cena is past his prime as a draw; numbers show he isn't.

Cena has nothing to gain. He has hit his peak and is probably on the decline, and to say that he was responsible for the money brought in for WM is silly, but no doubt he was a part of it....so, use Cena to make Ziggler. Why not?

Just because you beat a guy doesn't mean you're instantly going to get that guy over. That was the kind of thinking Russo used when he wanted to establish Billy Kidman by beating Hulk Hogan, and it actually hurt his career more than it helped him. What will help him is if he has competitive matches, where it's shown that he can hang with the top guy in the company. That seems to be exactly what's going on with Ziggler/Cena. I just don't see how Dolph loses anything when it's shown how well he can hang with the top guy in the company.

I don't get why wrestling fans would not want that. It would not hurt Cena and now you have a monster heel, kicking ass and taking names. A legit threat that can win anywhere, anytime. Meanwhile, Cena moves on to the next feud and no harm no foul...And even better, you can set up something else a year or two from now, to play off it, continue the feud.

Well, that's implying the feud is over... There's no guarantee to that.

Now WWE has two moneymakers and maybe they can headline a WM.

Right now, they don't need a moneymaker... Wrestlemania is already going to draw, and they can spend all of this year making Dolph into the moneymaker. The thing is, Dolph may or may not be able to do it... but we'll all find out real soon

 

[dukes07]

Prescribe; order, enjoin, recommend. You're not saying you can do any of these things; what you're saying is you can't agree to it.



Well, there we go. There's something there, and let's see what point you're going with here.



Umaga was extremely one dimensional; he was a one shot opponent, who you could probably get two or three main events out of, at best.



You've already mentioned that Batista was leaving anyway, so what benefit does it serve for Batista to beat Cena.

Also, the feud started out with Batista destroying Cena, and one of the points to this feud was that Cena had never beaten Batista before.



Which is somewhat of a mute point, when you consider that without Cena, Nexus doesn't get nearly as over as it did to begin with. But, the problem with Nexus was that there was that, just like Umaga, there's only so much you can do with the invading faction, especially with all of the bad luck it endured, and the when you consider that most of the Nexus, at least on their own merits, weren't good enough.

I grant you this; Summerslam was a fairly big letdown. But again, aside from that night, Cena gave plenty to the Nexus. The problem was twofold;

1. Nexus was booked rather poorly after Summerslam

2. Most of the talent in the Nexus weren't all that talented; Slater was probably the best worker, then Gabriel, but after that, who could really carry their own feud at that time?



Again, you're dealing with two issues;

1. How you book the guy feuding with Cena after the Cena feud.

2. Sheamus and The Nexus in particular are guys that weren't exactly ready for the push they got.

You know who was ready for the push he got, and was booked relatively well after his feud with Cena? CM Punk. And look what that did for his career. Now, of course, you can say Punk did a lot to get himself over, but every good feud needs for wrestlers to play off one another.



Which is true, but why did this Wrestlemania do so damn well, when compared to others?



Again, fair, but there's objective fact to prove people still care about Cena.



Foley was also not the top draw in the company, so you weren't losing much by having him lose. With what you're proposing, it'd be more analogous to Rock being brought in to make Triple H.

Of course, I get what you're saying, but you're wrong if you think Cena is past his prime as a draw; numbers show he isn't.



Just because you beat a guy doesn't mean you're instantly going to get that guy over. That was the kind of thinking Russo used when he wanted to establish Billy Kidman by beating Hulk Hogan, and it actually hurt his career more than it helped him. What will help him is if he has competitive matches, where it's shown that he can hang with the top guy in the company. That seems to be exactly what's going on with Ziggler/Cena. I just don't see how Dolph loses anything when it's shown how well he can hang with the top guy in the company.



Well, that's implying the feud is over... There's no guarantee to that.



Right now, they don't need a moneymaker... Wrestlemania is already going to draw, and they can spend all of this year making Dolph into the moneymaker. The thing is, Dolph may or may not be able to do it... but we'll all find out real soon

I don't advocate his viewpoint, prescribe is a synonym and while not the cleanest word it works.

I was not around with Umaga but you said that he was one-dimensional. So is Cena. You are right Batista was leaving but why not have him win. Like I said there was no drama. Nexus became poorly booked after losing Cena. It was due to that match that there was nowhere else to go with that angle. It was a feud that could have went on for months and was the hottest thing going and I would argue most everyone agrees that it died that SummerSlam because the WWE did not have the balls to pull the trigger and if you look back at their history then they have a habit of doing this.

Then there is Brock Lesnar and I don't need to explain that. You just stated that Cena is the big draw but then that they don't need a moneymaker. And that we will see what Dolph has. But you keep dancing around the issue: Why not see what he has by beating Cena cleanly. They have nothing to lose. Nothing. If WrestleMania can headline itself then why have Cena win all the time? I bet if you look at the ratings they are relatively stable when Cena is not on TV.

Also, after doing some research, a lot of sites are baffled as to why Cena beat Ziggler so soundly two weeks in a row. Now that is their opinion of course, however, if you look at his wins and losses. He has lost clean to the Rock and the Rock alone. You can count Punk at MitB though some argue that Vince and Ace getting involved discount it. Cena is not the draw he used to be. He is main-eventing every PPV and yet buyrates are down and ratings are down too. If he is the face of the WWE, and the main guy then he has to take some of the blame. Listen to the boos of the crowd....It is clear that he is not the draw the WWE would like him to be but he makes enough money that they fear pushing him aside. I don't advocate (or prescribe) that because he does put on good matches and works hard. But he needs to be reinvented.

Finally, what feud with Cena has been good? Where has there been a surprise in the outcome the last half decade or more? The nearest I can come to is the Rock and maybe Punk but with Punk, it worked in the bigger scheme of what the WWE had to do at the time. Who after having a feud with Cena has been elevated to the next level? What stars has he built?

As for Foley he was still a top guy. He had just been champ less than a year before. And Austin and the Rock did put over Trips in 00/01. Essentially, I can think of no new stars that the WWE has created. There is Punk but he was a star before the WWE and it took them years to get off their ass and have him learn the WWE style and not criticize Cena to get his well deserved push....Mayhap you are arguing for arguments sake and that is what I like to do as well, but Cena really offers very little right now except getting kids in the seats and hoping that their parents bring them.

 

[Headman]

Whoa, so now we are resorting to name calling because I don't prescribe to your viewpoint. I had a feeling it would come to this: A passive aggressive "bad-ass." So it is clear that your head is far up Cena's ass. You may be John Cena himself or his mother. I am not sure why are so angry, maybe you need to get laid or drunk or both.

Anyway, I leave will it at this: Cena cannot wrestle. He is booed more often than not. He is shoved down our throats. And he wins far too often. He no-sells everything. His feuds suck ass. Ziggler is far superior than he is and he is the one that it made it look like Cena can wrestle.

But then again I cannot take you seriously when you it is obvious you know shit about booking and wrestling in general, gushing about Cena's two clean wins in a row and then forgetting about all the other feuds and pushes short-circuited by him. And it is not a time tested practice for heels to be booked as *****es. It is a WWE practice. And to compare Cena to Austin and even Hogan proves you drank the Kool-Aid. So go on back to your Cena posters and ejaculate.

lol you come right back with the name calling. And the comparison with Austin and Hogan is that he's the top guy of his generation. What's so hard to understand about that? You keep claiming that every person who disagrees with you has his "Head up Cena's ass" and you keep insinuating that everyone agrees with you save for a few deranged Cena marks. Honestly I can't believe anyone is still responding to your posts because they're all so typical of someone suffering from Cena derangement syndrome.

 

[Con T.]

He is main-eventing every PPV and yet buyrates are down and ratings are down too.

Um, that isn't exactly true; in fact, pay per view buys are up, compared to last year;

All from the December 31st issue of the Wrestling Observer;

WWE DOMESTIC PPV AVERAGES:

2011: 171,000

2012: 200,000

NON-MANIA AVERAGE:

2011: 127,600

2012: 153,000

You can argue this has more to do with Rock and Brock returning, but it doesn't explain numbers like June's No Way Out, which did a domestic number of 194,000 buys, up from 170,000 for 2011's Capital Punishment, nor does it explain Over the Limit's 174,000 buys, better than the 140,000 buys done for 2011's Over the Limit. PPV numbers, as a whole, were all up last year, which would indicate Cena is far from done as a top draw.

I'm nowhere near done yet. Again, from the December 31st edition of The Wrestling Observer:

MOST MAIN EVENTS DRAWING MORE THAN 10,000 FANS

19 - John Cena

12 - C.M. Punk

6 - Kane

5 - The Rock, Big Show

4 - Brock Lesnar

3 - Jon Jones , Hiroshi Tanahashi, Chris Jericho, Dolph Ziggler, John Laurinaitis, Ryback

This makes the fifth year that John Cena headlined the most shows that drew above 10,000 fans, after previously being the leader in 2007, 2009, 2010 and 2011. With five No. 1 years, he’s in a very rare category, tied with Joe Stecher, Ed “Strangler” Lewis, The Sheik and Argentina Rocca. The only ones ahead of him in pro wrestling history would be Jim Londos (13), Bruno Sammartino (8), Hulk Hogan (8), Bill Longson (7) and Lou Thesz (7).

Also;

LARGEST ATTENDANCE

64,900 - 4/1 WWE WrestleMania 28 Miami Sun Life Stadium (John Cena vs. The Rock)

23,000 - 1/4 New Japan Tokyo Dome (Hiroshi Tanahashi vs. Minoru Suzuki)

21,000* - 3/4 UFC 144 Saitama Super Arena (Frankie Edgar vs. Benson Henderson)

19,000 - 8/5 AAA TripleMania Mexico City Arena Ciudad de Mexico (Dr. Wagner Jr. vs. Mascara Ano 2000 Jr. mask vs. mask)

18,318* - 7/23 WWE Raw 1,000 St. Louis Savvis Center (The Rock, John Cena, C.M. Punk, HHH, Brock Lesnar, Undertaker)

18,303* - 12/10/11 UFC 140 Toronto Air Canada Centre (Jon Jones vs. Lyoto Machida)

18,121* - 1/29 WWE Royal Rumble St. Louis Savvis Center

18,088* - 3/19 WWE Raw Philadelphia Wells Fargo Arena (John Cena and Rock)

17,482* - 8/19 WWE SummerSlam Los Angeles Staples Center (Brock Lesnar vs. HHH)

17,249 - 11/17 UFC 154 Montreal Bell Center (Georges St-Pierre vs. Carlos Condit)

17,000 - 3/18 WWE New York Madison Square Garden (John Cena vs. Kane Last Man Standing)

John Cena was the main headlining name for just a little under half of the largest attendances in Wrestling and Mixed Martial Arts. So again, this notion that he's winding down as a draw is a logical fallacy. Numbers are in fact up this year.

Again, you argue that they wouldn't have anything to lose by Ziggler winning, but you've yet to really argue anything about what they lose from Ziggler losing. Ziggler looks competitive against the WWE's top guy; how is this a bad thing, at all

 

[dukes07]

Ah but you could argue that 2011 was a terrible year, the buyrates were in the shitter. Miz had not set the world on fire as champ. Cena was champ for a few months out of the year too. One could also argue that not having Cena as champ has helped the company. You hit the nail on the head that Brock and the Rock have helped revitalize the company and Punk has kept the show fresh. Cena is also going to have the most draws because he is in most of the main events.

Your argument that Ziggler is getting a rub is a major fallacy. He is getting dominated by Cena. Ziggler has the MitB case. Therefore he should be getting a big push and not constantly losing. How are you getting a so-called rub when you always lose? You don't.

You keep asking me the same question, which I answer but you refuse to answer any queries of mine, insisting on throwing out gate receipts instead. I gave examples of top stars putting guys over, making their careers or at least elevating them. I did write why it is a good idea to build new stars and to give Ziggler a win. There is no reason not to. The idea in wrestling is to build for the future while making money for the here and now. Vince has been decrying the lack of a midcard and he has been worried about the future. Well, like I said, if you give the guy a title shot and in fact a brief reign as champ then you must see something in Ziggler or a Daniel Bryan or a Wade Barrett or whomever. But you cannot build for a future when you have one guy win all the time. Someday Cena is going to leave. His job, while making money, should be to put other guys over. If Ziggler goes over the WWE is not going to lose fans. Hell, they may gain fans, as what it does is build suspense that anything can happen at anytime. Shit, I would watch the show more and buy a PPV and guess what, that is more revenue.

In fact I also wrote a paragraph not that long ago on what good it could do. You have yet to establish why it is not a good idea. You think that this is not a good idea for some reason. No one has gotten such a rub from Cena. Two of the hottest angles were shortchanged because WWE felt Cena needed to go over. This is more Vince's fault than anyone else's. In fact I cannot think of, though I am quite slow, of one feud where Cena did not dominate. The Rock does not hurt Cena as they fed him Lesnar next month. They could have made Cena more interesting by having him lose. By having him on the outs and then build himself back up....They don't. They just do the same thing week after week.

 

[rerun406]

^ but how competitive does Ziggler really look against Cena if he hits big move after big move and is still unable to get a pinfall.

the big DDT, Super Kick, and so forth yet Cena survived it all 2 weeks in a row, to beat Ziggler.

as others have been saying, it's not just that Cena beat Ziggler twice in a row that's terrible for Ziggler

but the booking of it, to make Cena basically bounce back from everything thrown at him hurts Ziggler's character and legitimacy to ever make it as a Main Eventer

**Ziggler did get the win over Cena at TLC, but has he been able to beat Cena before or since then? NO

feuding with Cena is certainly a benefit to Ziggler's career, but he's also got to win matches, IMO simply being competitive won't be enough

**in pro sports do you think a coach is happy if his team gets swept 4-0 and lost every game by really close margins, "Oh well at least we were competitive"

bull. you need to win to be competitive, and Pro Wrestling winning matters, so Ziggler coming close and losing is still losing.

He can't exactly come on RAW the next week and brag and boast about losing his Cage match last week to John Cena.

 

[The Butcher]

I've drifted in and out of the IWC for years now, going from forum to forum as the spirit moves me, and if there is one commonality among them all it is the complaining. Complaining about Cena; complaining about the lack of new stars; complaining about the old stars not being on anniversary shows; complaining about people complaining. If only all that time and energy was put to better use. I'm just glad there was no IWC during Hulkamania.

Anyway, going back to dukes07 OP on this matter:

it would not hurt him to lose cleanly. That is my point.

That's all you needed to say, and I agree with that statement. WWE disagrees with us. Life goes on. So, if you're a Ziggler fan, just keep your gaze locked on that briefcase and enjoy his work. All of this nonsense about buyrates and who's the better wrestler and the name-calling is pointless. Cena isn't Austin or Hogan, no, but he is in the same spot in the WWE pecking order that the latter two were, and they didn't do clean jobs on free TV either.

 

[dukes07]

I've drifted in and out of the IWC for years now, going from forum to forum as the spirit moves me, and if there is one commonality among them all it is the complaining. Complaining about Cena; complaining about the lack of new stars; complaining about the old stars not being on anniversary shows; complaining about people complaining. If only all that time and energy was put to better use. I'm just glad there was no IWC during Hulkamania.

Anyway, going back to dukes07 OP on this matter:



That's all you needed to say, and I agree with that statement. WWE disagrees with us. Life goes on. So, if you're a Ziggler fan, just keep your gaze locked on that briefcase and enjoy his work. All of this nonsense about buyrates and who's the better wrestler and the name-calling is pointless. Cena isn't Austin or Hogan, no, but he is in the same spot in the WWE pecking order that the latter two were, and they didn't do clean jobs on free TV either.

Ah yes, but it is fun to argue. Wrestling is such a murky subject with so much going on that we rarely find out the truth. Hell some people still believe that Bret was in on the Screwjob, Hogan and Nash purposely killed WCW, and Benoit did not kill his wife and kid.

Arguing about Cena or what have you is like bitching about your favorite team if there is a QB controversy or they should have played a soft defense or why Peyton Manning fucking chokes in the Playoffs. Or why Ray Lewis gets accolades when he stabs people.

But to the point. I am not a huge fan of Ziggler, but I do enjoy his work. I also don't think he needs to win cleanly on RAW but one of those matches should have been him winning via cheating. If you are going to put someone over cleanly and I know Hogan and Austin rarely did it and some argue that another reason Austin took his ball and went home was that he refused to put over Lesnar, is that it should be done on PPV.

Another thing too: I am not a fan of face Hogan but he was still a decent draw in WCW but they ran out of shit for him to do, hence the nWo. He reinvented himself. Austin was the anti-hero and I do think he won too much but he had charisma and before his neck injury the fucker could wrestle. He also was on top for maybe 3-4 years, including his injuries.

Maybe because I am older and not wiser but I just don't really like how Cena is force fed to the fans. His gimmick is stale and it is the same thing week in and week out. No drama. Nothing. Oh he may lose via some sort of bullshit but you know he is getting that win back. I am not saying that Cena needs to turn heel (though admittedly that would be cool) but dammit, give us some change, something, anything. I get why they don't, why risk changing something that is still making money. But as a fan I am going to piss and moan. Much like I piss and moan when the fucking Steelers turn the ball over more often than a girl gets on Facebook.

 

[Slick21]

See, to me that 20th anniversary episode just shows me why I truly believe Vince and his company does not compare about us viewers. It has nothing to do with the legends, I'm not going to moan if they don't show on a episode special, it's more than that. It's the fact that they didn't even TRY to give us a good alternative or make up for the non-showing legends. You can have a commercial free special, slammy award show, throw out a free PPV for all that it's worth and they still won't do shit that's even remotely appealing.

Raw will always be trash until they can pull off a good shocking angle for an ending, like what Punk did in his promo.

 

[The Butcher]

Ah yes, but it is fun to argue. Wrestling is such a murky subject with so much going on that we rarely find out the truth. Hell some people still believe that Bret was in on the Screwjob, Hogan and Nash purposely killed WCW, and Benoit did not kill his wife and kid.

Arguing about Cena or what have you is like bitching about your favorite team if there is a QB controversy or they should have played a soft defense or why Peyton Manning fucking chokes in the Playoffs. Or why Ray Lewis gets accolades when he stabs people.

But to the point. I am not a huge fan of Ziggler, but I do enjoy his work. I also don't think he needs to win cleanly on RAW but one of those matches should have been him winning via cheating. If you are going to put someone over cleanly and I know Hogan and Austin rarely did it and some argue that another reason Austin took his ball and went home was that he refused to put over Lesnar, is that it should be done on PPV.

Another thing too: I am not a fan of face Hogan but he was still a decent draw in WCW but they ran out of shit for him to do, hence the nWo. He reinvented himself. Austin was the anti-hero and I do think he won too much but he had charisma and before his neck injury the fucker could wrestle. He also was on top for maybe 3-4 years, including his injuries.

Maybe because I am older and not wiser but I just don't really like how Cena is force fed to the fans. His gimmick is stale and it is the same thing week in and week out. No drama. Nothing. Oh he may lose via some sort of bullshit but you know he is getting that win back. I am not saying that Cena needs to turn heel (though admittedly that would be cool) but dammit, give us some change, something, anything. I get why they don't, why risk changing something that is still making money. But as a fan I am going to piss and moan. Much like I piss and moan when the fucking Steelers turn the ball over more often than a girl gets on Facebook.

A Steelers fan? That explains a lot. Lewis never stabbed anyone just like Roethlisberger never raped anyone, right? Anyway, I'll see you around the sports forum to talk football. Well, next season, at least.

Seriously though, I hear you on a lot of your Cena gripes. I share some of them. The thing about it, though, is he's not for us. His character isn't designed to appeal to our demographic. I'm fully aware that plenty of men my age do like Cena's character, but a lot of guys my age are Bronies*, too.

The way I see it is that getting upset about Cena or frustrated with him is akin to yelling "the monkey is right the eff there!!!!" at Dora the Explorer. John and Dora aren't talking to you. They're talking to the kids. That's why Cena often summarizes and recaps the show's events during promos. It's why his jokes are pee-pee and poopie and weiner jokes. And it's why he's on top, because I'm positive there are a lot more John Cena t-shirts around the playground than the watercooler

Now, granted, he can put on much better match than Dora, but his promos, mannerisms, and powers of recuperation are all just too goofy for me to fuss about it. So long as guys like Ziggler and Randy Savage are on the card to bring the steak, I'm fine with guys like Cena and Hogan being the sizzle. And like I said before, I had Hulkamania in my day and kids today should have their wrestling superhero, too. And they'll have their perceptions of him shattered one day, too. The circle of life.

 

[dukes07]

A Steelers fan? That explains a lot. Lewis never stabbed anyone just like Roethlisberger never raped anyone, right? Anyway, I'll see you around the sports forum to talk football. Well, next season, at least.

Seriously though, I hear you on a lot of your Cena gripes. I share some of them. The thing about it, though, is he's not for us. His character isn't designed to appeal to our demographic. I'm fully aware that plenty of men my age do like Cena's character, but a lot of guys my age are Bronies*, too.

The way I see it is that getting upset about Cena or frustrated with him is akin to yelling "the monkey is right the eff there!!!!" at Dora the Explorer. John and Dora aren't talking to you. They're talking to the kids. That's why Cena often summarizes and recaps the show's events during promos. It's why his jokes are pee-pee and poopie and weiner jokes. And it's why he's on top, because I'm positive there are a lot more John Cena t-shirts around the playground than the watercooler

Now, granted, he can put on much better match than Dora, but his promos, mannerisms, and powers of recuperation are all just too goofy for me to fuss about it. So long as guys like Ziggler and Randy Savage are on the card to bring the steak, I'm fine with guys like Cena and Hogan being the sizzle. And like I said before, I had Hulkamania in my day and kids today should have their wrestling superhero, too. And they'll have their perceptions of him shattered one day, too. The circle of life.

Exactly! The said thing is that I wrote a letter to the Steelers pissed that they did not cut him. Now I have moved on but I still don't really like the guy.

As for Cena. I agree. I can understand respecting the guy, but as an adult male I cannot fathom being a fan. With Hogan there is nostalgia and I still don't really like the guy. His TNA run is fucking embarrassing.

I will say that when I went back to watch the Monday Night Wars, I became a fan of a lot of guys that I did not like currently like Rey Mysterio and Edge. Hell, I became a fan of Goldberg too. And I even respect HBK more despite the bullshit of the 90s. I think something about WWE faces rubs me the wrong way. They always win and just annoy the shit out of me, such as Edge did or Rey and now Sheamus, Orton and Cena. Or I am just getting bitchy in my dotage. Anyway, at least in the 90s the WWF had a few strong heels and WCW always booked them strong (maybe too much so). I will say that the one strong heel that always bothered me is HHH. I did not want to buy into the smark hype but I have seen his path of destruction firsthand, his 20 minute promos that could be summed up in 2. His 18 minute entrance. His association (work wise) with Stephanie as her character blew the doors off when it came to annoying. But I will say that I don't blame him, he came up in the 90s from the bottom and worked his way up. But I don't have to like him....

Sorry about the rambling....

 

[hlhbk]

So before I post this there are 2 things I want to make clear:

1. I am a long time WWE fan but also a fan of professional wrestling in general. I was a huge ECW and somewhat of a fan of WCW. I started watching at the age of 12 in 1993, and have been watching ever since. I am primarily a fan of the actual wrestling and telling a story without ever picking up a microphone, but if you are able to have a killer promo and decent wrestling skills I will give you a chance. My favorite wrestler of all time is HBK.

2. I was not sure where to post this, so please move if needed. Please PM me if moved where it was moved to.

Up until almost 2 years ago it was rare I ever stopped watching the WWE ever since I was a kid. I have been to countless live events including house shows, RAW and PPV events. I have driven several hours away to see shows and at one point considered myself a hardcore WWE fan. Even after the Attitude era ended I loved WWE and even though I was angry about what WWE did to ECW in 06 I kept following all of the WWE as an overall product until about 2008.

At this time some of my favorite performers were gone or leaving. Taking their place were a bunch of kids that in general can't hold a handle to the performers they are replacing. Minus a few performers (CM Punk, and Dolph Ziggler, Daniel B. are probably the only ones I really follow along with HHH) the roster was boring on the mic and in the ring.

Leading up to HBK's retirement I started DVRing RAW and fast forwarding through any segment not featuring the people I listed above I would fast forward past all other segments. Once HBK retired I would again fast forward to the people I listed above, and as people kept leaving I kept watching less and less of the WWE.

I say all this to lead up to this past Monday. I was jacked. I figured of all shows the WWE would hit a home run for the 20th anniversary of RAW considering the 1000th episode wasn't that great. Instead what we got was:

1. A great opening montage of RAW over the years.

2. A lame segment to open the show with Del Rio, Big Show and Vince.

3. Some decent video packages of RAW over the years.

4. A terrible and long Diva's match.

5. The announcement that suprised nobody that Foley was in the HOF. We never hear foley speak in the ring and have to sit through another lame shield segment.

6. The WWE Champ WRESTLING AT MID CARD against B. Clay. The same B. Clay Punk tried to help out by including him in his promo last week, but was forced to bury Clay in the ring. Great use of one of the best heels in the last 15 years WWE!

7. We got a Miz and Flair segment. It was ok I guess, but its sad Flair was the hilight of the odl school guys to come back.

8. We got a terrible over the top rope challenge.

9. We got a good to great match from Ziggler and Cena, but yet again just like the last 10 years supercena was kicking out of every finisher known to man. Yet when Dolph is hit but I of Cena's finishers he is pinned. Yawn, WWE. Same old crap.

10. We got a GREAT Rock concert segment. I know it upset a lot of people due to Vickie being Eddie's widow, but I am sure she signed off on it, so I am good with it.

So again this is the 20TH ANNIVERSARY OF YOUR FLAGSHIP SHOW! You didn't have a lot of major names on the 1000th RAW, so you would figure you would have them on this. Where is SCSA, HBK, Undertaker, Edge, Bret Hart, and all of the other legends that made RAW what is was over the last 20 years?

9 years ago I was attending RAW drafts in Detriot (the one Edge returned from his neck injury at) that blew the 1000th episode and the 20th annivery episode out of the water even if they were one show combined! Yes I know SCSA and HBK were booked in Vegas, but that is just unacceptable. Book them ahead of time to appear!

For the first time in a long time I was considering purchasing the Royal Rumble based on the Rock Vs Punk and the Rumble alone. After the aweful show that essentially slapped the old school fans in the face this past Monday I may never watch the WWE again.

I realize you need to build new stars, but this past Monday was not a place for that.