The Chief

I think a lot of the negativity towards Cena is directly related to the time he came up through. Cena debuted post-Attitude era where most smarts hated anybody new who wasn't brought up through WCW, ECW or the territories because they "didn't pay their dues." That was also the time of the internet super-worker, so if you didn't have kewl movez, you were a bad worker. Smart fans are the easiest fans to work, so WWE started incorporating those elements into Cena's character. The 50/50 crowd reactions became the new millenium WWE Main Event style in the same way brawls through the crowd were a staple before that. I do think that the WWE booking gets a little too cutesy for it's own good, because when they do try to book Cena into sympathy roles, he's pretty damn great. If WWE booked him a little simpler instead of trying to work the smarts, I think perception would be a lot different.

Just listened to it, not a Keith fan so wasn't sure what to expect, but it was interesting. "The fans were immediately tired of Hogan the day after he won the belt in 2002" Really?

Wasn't Loch Ness signed because WCW thought they were getting some Vader-esque super-monster for Hogan to slay? WCW not realizing that a UK monster is much, much different?

For the record, I like Larry I was just trying to think of a circumstance where a promotion was falling apart and used somebody in a top role where they probably wouldn't get that opportunity anywhere else. I guess this means there's only one Bulldog Bob Brown

True. Not taking anything away from Larry, but I think anyone could have been plugged into that role with Bruno and it would still draw.

El P details this pretty well in his death of WCW megathread. The face/heel demographic flipped back and forth so many times in 1999 its hard to say. From a fantasy booking standpoint, it wouldn't be as simple as Goldberg chasing Nash for a few months, you would have to literally rebook the entire promotion from the ground up. I think when Goldberg finally got his revenge on Nash most fans didn't even remember what the issue was in the first place, and the feud was kept far away from the title. It's amazing in retrospect that Goldberg only had one title reign.

Larry Z at the end of the AWA. He's decent enough, but nothing he's ever accomplished would make you think "top guy." But the AWA talent pool was in the toilet by that point.

Would a "Bob Brown type" need to be a guy who may not be any good, but was working in such a dull territory that he was actually the best option? Or are we just talking about poor company aces? Poor company aces are common, I think the first example is much more interesting, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.

I always thought Matt Hardy had a nice snap to his punches.

I always thought Tatanka on the SmackDown roster in 2006 was so strange. He left WWE in 1996, then... nothing. He might have done a couple spot shows, but for all intents and purposes he dropped off the grid completely. Then all of the sudden he's back under contract. And it wasn't like they were bringing him back for a nostalgia run, I don't think anyone was clamoring for the return of Tatanka. Just weird.