Topic: Elimination Chamber PPV thread

[OneManX]

He didn't beat the New Nexus... to be fair.

If there's anyone actually that has been a legitimate foil for Cena, it's been Punk, at least as far as new(er) main event guys go.

Edge and Orton in the past.

Rock was there for 2-3 years (toward the end of Austin's run so early 2000s), and then it was the Brock Lesner show, but he bounced.

Yeah Cena hasn't had one rival like McMahon/Austin. He's had multiple rivals pop up at times. From Edge, to Orton, to the Nexus, to maybe punk, he's pretty much been a big foil for Cena in the last few months, with Cena getting 1 pin on punk and that was last night.

[OneManX]

Yeah, and what other promotion kept a guy on top despite the fact business was flagging with him on top? Failing ones, that's what.

...Despite profitable years, blah blah blah same stuff different thread.

[FreebirdSTF]

The problem is that we don't know if ratings/merch/etc would be better if things weren't simply "The Cena Show."  You seem to suggest that he's the best they could hope to do and to continue to feed that beast.  I'm no so sure it is.  Just because he's the best thing you have going doesn't mean he's actually the best thing you have. 

[Little Jimmy]

Rock was there for 2-3 years (toward the end of Austin's run so early 2000s), and then it was the Brock Lesner show, but he bounced.

Yeah Cena hasn't had one rival like McMahon/Austin. He's had multiple rivals pop up at times. From Edge, to Orton, to the Nexus, to maybe punk, he's pretty much been a big foil for Cena in the last few months, with Cena getting 1 pin on punk and that was last night.

The end of Austin's run? It had to be longer, because I remember Austin throwing Rocks Intercontinental title in a river(or it might have been the other way around). Plus they fought at two Wrestlemania's at least.... It had to be longer than that.

[OneManX]

The end of Austin's run? It had to be longer, because I remember Austin throwing Rocks Intercontinental title in a river(or it might have been the other way around). Plus they fought at two Wrestlemania's at least.... It had to be longer than that.

I'm going from the Mania, Austin's heel turn/Rock's face turn, since that was (debatable) the end of Austin's run at the top of card. (2000-2001 'Invasion) left in 2002, Rock left in '03 It was being transitioned into the Brock lesner show, but he left in 2004.

[TH]

...Despite profitable years, blah blah blah same stuff different thread.

Yeah, same stuff because you obviously don't get it. Niall smacked you down on the "profitable" talking point, yet here you go still blathering on like it's 1999. It's not.

[OneManX]

Yeah, same stuff because you obviously don't get it. Niall smacked you down on the "profitable" talking point, yet here you go still blathering on like it's 1999. It's not.

No, he thinks it's 99 and RATINGSANDBUYRATESMATTER~! Even though they dont.

[TH]

No, he thinks it's 99 and RATINGSANDBUYRATESMATTER~! Even though they dont.

Okay, revenue streams don't matter!

[FreebirdSTF]

On the Austin/Rock thing: didn't Austin/Rock main event like three WrestleManias?

[OneManX]

Okay, revenue streams don't matter!

When the market is DRASTICALLY different and not taking it into consideration?

[FreebirdSTF]

They had 3 high-profile WrestleMania matches btw.  The first in 99 and the last in 03.

Austin threw the IC title in the river back in 96-97 fwiw.

[tillrules]

What is concidered a top contender? He's already defeated Orton twice. He beat Lawler, he beat Kofi, he beat Daniel Bryan, he's beaten R-Truth(althoughI'm pretty sure I have beaten R-Truth so does that count?).. What other faces are there that he needs to test himself against, especially on RAW? Evan Bourne isn't there to kick around(hi Tom). So who? Mark Henry? Santino?

It's not just winning, but winning in a relatively convincing manner.  He's beaten Orton twice, once with the MiTB after Orton had just wrestled and once with multiple person interference.  He's never come close to beating Cena.  Those two, along with UT and HHH are the only people who really matter if the goal is to create a real top performer to step in when HHH & UT finally retire.   Otherwise, his highest upside becomes Edge or Jericho, namely guys who can be up top and be solid, but never able to beat the biggest names. 

The point people keep missing is that even chickenshit champions need to have some credibility.   They don't need to be dominant or always win cleanly.   But there has to be the feeling that the champion is good enough to at least compete without help.  That requires some manner of clean win at some point over the elite talents, not just other guys on the same level.

[Chus-Kay]

It's not just winning, but winning in a relatively convincing manner.  He's beaten Orton twice, once with the MiTB after Orton had just wrestled and once with multiple person interference.  He's never come close to beating Cena.  Those two, along with UT and HHH are the only people who really matter if the goal is to create a real top performer to step in when HHH & UT finally retire.   Otherwise, his highest upside becomes Edge or Jericho, namely guys who can be up top and be solid, but never able to beat the biggest names. 

The point people keep missing is that even chickenshit champions need to have some credibility.   They don't need to be dominant or always win cleanly.   But there has to be the feeling that the champion is good enough to at least compete without help.  That requires some manner of clean win at some point over the elite talents, not just other guys on the same level.

eh, i still don't think the problem is miz.  i think they've just built cena as leagues better than anyone else on the roster.

the champ does not have to be good enough to compete w/o help.  he just has to be good enough to hold onto the strap.

[tillrules]

Was austin different? Hogan? Sammartino? Backlund? Flair? Goldberg? Inoki? Tsurta? Misawa? Lawler? El Santo? Mistico?

All machines that companies built up guys to feed to, in their time, it was their world and everyone else was living in it.

While this is undoubtedly true, the modern era is different for the simple fact that this is the first generation of fans who have been raised (for lack of a better term) on the concept of change as the only constant.  When a Backlund or Hogan had a long title reign, it was what was expected.  Champions reigned for a long time.  The same with the regional champions like Lawler or Dusty.  Fans wanted and accepted that status quo.

The modern fan is different.  The last 15 years have been centered around the concepts of change and surprise.  Title change hands with more regularity, alliances change and shift.  The end result of things continually returning to a single default set up is contrary to this thinking.  With this being the case, having one invincible centerpiece who essentially represents a status quo or default status, is not a good idea.

SCSA does illustrate your point to an extent.  SCSA was as protected as Cena, maybe moreso.  No one ever got over on him or fooled him or out thought him.  He rarely lost cleanly and if he did he would get some manner of moral victory or embarrass the winner in some way.  But one thing that SCSA was not, was a dominant champion in the sense that he had the belt constantly.   HHH held the belt more often and for longer times than SCSA did.   

The major difference is that SCSA did not represent the status quo in the way that Cena does.  SCSA always won, but his wins were personal and they didn't carry such a sense of inevitability as Cena does.  What I mean by that is that with real nearly equal options like Rock or HHH to hold the belt, SCSA being kept strong never felt like he was inevitably going to be champion every time he feuded with the champion or challenged for it.  Cena has that sense, in the same way that HHH had it during his last big run, where it feels like no champion has a chance to hold him off.

[tillrules]

eh, i still don't think the problem is miz.  i think they've just built cena as leagues better than anyone else on the roster.

the champ does not have to be good enough to compete w/o help.  he just has to be good enough to hold onto the strap.

That's the central difference of opinion here.  He has to be able to hold on to the belt on his own merits, even if he cheats to do it.  Again, I don't think Miz needs to pin Cena cleanly, but he has to beat him in a way that it is his work that gets it done.  In other words, no multiple person beatdown, no impossible odds, just Miz and his skills (including his ability to cheat to win) winning a bout against Cena.  Otherwise, he's just a place holder and the fans can't buy into him or put any special emphasis on Cena's ability to beat him. 

[OneManX]

While this is undoubtedly true, the modern era is different for the simple fact that this is the first generation of fans who have been raised (for lack of a better term) on the concept of change as the only constant.  When a Backlund or Hogan had a long title reign, it was what was expected.  Champions reigned for a long time.  The same with the regional champions like Lawler or Dusty.  Fans wanted and accepted that status quo.

The modern fan is different.  The last 15 years have been centered around the concepts of change and surprise.  Title change hands with more regularity, alliances change and shift.  The end result of things continually returning to a single default set up is contrary to this thinking.  With this being the case, having one invincible centerpiece who essentially represents a status quo or default status, is not a good idea.

SCSA does illustrate your point to an extent.  SCSA was as protected as Cena, maybe moreso.  No one ever got over on him or fooled him or out thought him.  He rarely lost cleanly and if he did he would get some manner of moral victory or embarrass the winner in some way.  But one thing that SCSA was not, was a dominant champion in the sense that he had the belt constantly.   HHH held the belt more often and for longer times than SCSA did.   

The major difference is that SCSA did not represent the status quo in the way that Cena does.  SCSA always won, but his wins were personal and they didn't carry such a sense of inevitability as Cena does.  What I mean by that is that with real nearly equal options like Rock or HHH to hold the belt, SCSA being kept strong never felt like he was inevitably going to be champion every time he feuded with the champion or challenged for it.  Cena has that sense, in the same way that HHH had it during his last big run, where it feels like no champion has a chance to hold him off.

But...

You have long term champions, it goes stale

Constant change, it devalues the belt and it makes winning it meaningless.

According to arguments that I've had to deal with (not from here)

Most of Stone Cold runs were at the smallest 2 months(OBVIOUSLY skipping losing it to Kane the next night), average 3 months, with one going 4 months. HHH didn't start stacking up reigns until Austin leaves, where HHH is pretty much the top guy (his Evolution-run)/ in terms of overall, Austin held the belt about the same amount of times Cena has in spans of their career (so far) Austin with 6 in 7. and Cena with 7 in 5.

As for your last point, that's purely speculation, SCSA's runs meant a lot to us, who's to say Cena's run doesn't mean alot of the current fans now? It's easy to think that way b/c the curtain is pulled back, there isn't that aura of "What's gonna happen next?"

[Little Jimmy]

It's not just winning, but winning in a relatively convincing manner.  He's beaten Orton twice, once with the MiTB after Orton had just wrestled and once with multiple person interference.  He's never come close to beating Cena.  Those two, along with UT and HHH are the only people who really matter if the goal is to create a real top performer to step in when HHH & UT finally retire.   Otherwise, his highest upside becomes Edge or Jericho, namely guys who can be up top and be solid, but never able to beat the biggest names. 

The point people keep missing is that even chickenshit champions need to have some credibility.   They don't need to be dominant or always win cleanly.   But there has to be the feeling that the champion is good enough to at least compete without help.  That requires some manner of clean win at some point over the elite talents, not just other guys on the same level.

So let's say Cena and Miz have a 20 minute match.... Cena about 3 minutes into it beats the piss out of Riley, and he becomes a non factor, either that or the ref sends him to the back. Late in the match, Miz kicks out of an AA, Miz crawls to the ropes to break the STF... Somewhere in there is a ref bump, Miz gets a shot to the balls in on Cena, grabs a chair, and waffles Cena with it, then hits the SCF onto the chair.. Then he goes for the pin, pulls the jorts, and gets the 3 count to retain..

Would that be good enough in your opinion for Miz to have credibility.

[tillrules]

But...

You have long term champions, it goes stale

Constant change, it devalues the belt and it makes winning it meaningless.
[\quote]

I didn't say you need to do constant title changes.  My point was more about taking the inevitability out of it.  Not that Cena wins the belt all the time, but rather that when he tries, he inevitably does get it.  There has to be a feeling of the outcome of the match being in doubt.  Now admittedly, with a WM main that's tough as the face usually has to win to end the show, but there should still be some feeling that Miz has a chance if you throw out the business aspects.

According to arguments that I've had to deal with (not from here)

Most of Stone Cold runs were at the smallest 2 months(OBVIOUSLY skipping losing it to Kane the next night), average 3 months, with one going 4 months. HHH didn't start stacking up reigns until Austin leaves, where HHH is pretty much the top guy (his Evolution-run)/ in terms of overall, Austin held the belt about the same amount of times Cena has in spans of their career (so far) Austin with 6 in 7. and Cena with 7 in 5.

That's a significant difference.  SCSA held the belt for like 20 months in 7 years.  Cena has held the belt for a much higher percentage of time.  Not only that, when he's not being sidetracked in any way, he's been either champion or challenger nearly every month for the last 5 years.

As for your last point, that's purely speculation, SCSA's runs meant a lot to us, who's to say Cena's run doesn't mean alot of the current fans now? It's easy to think that way b/c the curtain is pulled back, there isn't that aura of "What's gonna happen next?"

There is evidence which says that Cena's run isn't effecting all of the fans.  It's the crowd reactions every single time he wrestles.  Did you ever see a split in the fans for SCSA?  Or Rock or HHH or Foley?  Cena obviously appeals to younger fans and women, that is obvious from the sounds of the cheers.

I've always advocated separating Cena from the title chase and giving him a quest of sorts.   Having Cena spend several months chasing an elusive foe who puts monsters in his way that Cena can defeat without having him in the title picture would be a good use for him.  It would allow him to be the superhero his fans want to see without making everyone on the roster clearly secondary.

[tillrules]

So let's say Cena and Miz have a 20 minute match.... Cena about 3 minutes into it beats the piss out of Riley, and he becomes a non factor, either that or the ref sends him to the back. Late in the match, Miz kicks out of an AA, Miz crawls to the ropes to break the STF... Somewhere in there is a ref bump, Miz gets a shot to the balls in on Cena, grabs a chair, and waffles Cena with it, then hits the SCF onto the chair.. Then he goes for the pin, pulls the jorts, and gets the 3 count to retain..

Would that be good enough in your opinion for Miz to have credibility.

Yes, actually it would.  You've addressed the two problems with Miz's push.  One, the complete reliance on Riley and outside interference and two, Miz's ability to have offense on his own/  In that scenario, Miz competes evenly for 15 minutes and shows toughness to survive Cena's finishers.  Then although he needs the chair to win, he still hits his finisher and defeats Cena. 

The point is that Cena should be slightly better than Miz, he's the face and has right and goodness on his side.  Miz should need to cheat to win, but what he shouldn't need is help from multiple guys to win.

[OneManX]

Yes, actually it would.  You've addressed the two problems with Miz's push.  One, the complete reliance on Riley and outside interference and two, Miz's ability to have offense on his own/  In that scenario, Miz competes evenly for 15 minutes and shows toughness to survive Cena's finishers.  Then although he needs the chair to win, he still hits his finisher and defeats Cena. 

The point is that Cena should be slightly better than Miz, he's the face and has right and goodness on his side.  Miz should need to cheat to win, but what he shouldn't need is help from multiple guys to win.

He's a heel, who gives a fuck HOW he wins as long as he wins it?

[OneManX]

That's a significant difference.  SCSA held the belt for like 20 months in 7 years.  Cena has held the belt for a much higher percentage of time.  Not only that, when he's not being sidetracked in any way, he's been either champion or challenger nearly every month for the last 5 years.

And Stone Cold was no different? He wasn't contending for the title?

There is evidence which says that Cena's run isn't effecting all of the fans.  It's the crowd reactions every single time he wrestles.  Did you ever see a split in the fans for SCSA?  Or Rock or HHH or Foley?  Cena obviously appeals to younger fans and women, that is obvious from the sounds of the cheers.

Stone Cold never had to deal with the IWC. And the business wasn't as "exposed" as it is now. And, again the booing, just works for Cena's character, instead of winning those people over, he keeps doing his things, pbecuase people are buying tickets to see him lose and are booing him when he comes out. Want him to go away? Don't buy tickets and dont react. The moment you react to it, you're pretty much sucked in.

I've always advocated separating Cena from the title chase and giving him a quest of sorts.   Having Cena spend several months chasing an elusive foe who puts monsters in his way that Cena can defeat without having him in the title picture would be a good use for him.  It would allow him to be the superhero his fans want to see without making everyone on the roster clearly secondary.

Nexus?

[tillrules]

And Stone Cold was no different? He wasn't contending for the title?
[\quote]

Not always.  He was often sidetracked with VKM's various flunkies and VKM himself.  He was never the default option like Cena is.

Stone Cold never had to deal with the IWC. And the business wasn't as "exposed" as it is now. And, again the booing, just works for Cena's character, instead of winning those people over, he keeps doing his things, pbecuase people are buying tickets to see him lose and are booing him when he comes out. Want him to go away? Don't buy tickets and dont react. The moment you react to it, you're pretty much sucked in.
[\quote]

He didn't?  You do know that the IWC has been around for nearly 20 years, right.  By 2000, wrestling news was relatively widespread.  Moreover, WWE itself had exposed the business with years of "shoot" promos and all that.   Moreover, you're doing what WWE does so often, blame the "internet" for their own predictability.  We aren't able to predict what happens because we read the internet, we can predict it because they do the same things over and over.

On the cheers, again, it is clear evidence of a split in the fanbase between Cena's fans and everyone else. 

Nexus?

Nexus was a nice idea and it did draw some pretty good reactions for him.  But even then, he was right back in the title picture after the initial defeat of the group at Summerslam.  Even with his "slavery" period, he was in title matches.  I'm talking a complete removal of him from the picture.  Letting him chase an elusive goal (like getting to a heel leader) while the others compete for the title.

[tillrules]

He's a heel, who gives a fuck HOW he wins as long as he wins it?

Because we have to believe that he's a challenge for the face.  If not, then there's no real point of having the face defeat him.  It's no challenge for Cena to chase and overcome a weak heel. 

Again, this goes back to what we're discussing in the other thread, wrestling is a simulation of competition and as such, it needs to have competitive elements and the possibility of change.

[OneManX]

Nexus was a nice idea and it did draw some pretty good reactions for him.  But even then, he was right back in the title picture after the initial defeat of the group at Summerslam.  Even with his "slavery" period, he was in title matches.  I'm talking a complete removal of him from the picture.  Letting him chase an elusive goal (like getting to a heel leader) while the others compete for the title.

He fought for the title at Night of Champions... his next title match Wrestlemania 27.

[tillrules]

He fought for the title at Night of Champions... his next title match Wrestlemania 27.

And refereed the title bout with Barrett v. Orton at Survivor Series and completely overshadowed it.  Then the next PPV was the match for his freedom and then he was in the Rumble and then fought for the title shot this week.  And now he's going to be champion again and we're back to step one with no one to challenge him.  That's what I mean by inevitability.