Extreme Rules

[El-P]

But now he's beatable.

Yea, that helped Goldberg a lot to realize that he was beatable after Starrcade 98.

[ohtani's jacket]

Oh come on, Lesnar's not Goldberg. That's stupid. A heel that needs to be protected with victories is a shit heel.

[kjh]

I don't really believe that anyone is truly Teflon to bad booking. I think Cena had the wind taken out of his sails in 2008 when he was playing second fiddle to Hunter on Raw and was pinned at four out of five PPVs by Orton, JBL and Batista. There is something to what Loss said about Cena needing a win after losing to Rock at WrestleMania plus if Lesnar had demolished Cena it would make it hard for fans to believe anyone else on the regular roster has a chance against him. Also, from a backstage standpoint, it'll stop Brock from getting the "who has he put over since coming back" catcalls that The Rock received. Brock showed he can play ball last night, that might help him out in the long run politically, even if it took the edge off his unstoppable aura a bit.

[Matt D]

Let's see how they can build Tensai out of this too.

[anarchistxx]

A heel that needs to be protected with victories is a shit heel.

I don't agree with this particularly. If you're building up a monster heel it makes sense that he's unstoppable for a while - because who you're really protecting is the top face who finally stops him.

 

If CM Punk or Randy Orton or whoever they want to give a huge rub to beats Lesnar now it's much less impactful, given that he's already lost. And not only lost, lost to a guy who lost his own last two big matches, one to a guy who the fans remember as perennial jobber Albert. Even if they want to give the rub to Cena for beating Brock, it makes much more sense to have him get destroyed first time around, and then come back rejuvenated and finally beat the guy who took him out. Rather than in a match with just a few weeks build.

 

That's disregarding the fact that the finish was stupid in the context of the match; the chain shot and the FU were pretty much the only offensive moves Cena hit in the entire twenty minutes. For him to get completely squashed all match and then recover to win with a couple of moves just didn't make sense. It made Lesnar look weak. It wasn't even a flash pin where they could paint is as a fluke or Lesnar losing concentration, it was decisive. Lesnar throws everything at Cena and can't put him away, Cena hits a couple of moves and Brock is finished. That's how the casual fan sees this.

[NintendoLogic]

Oh come on, Lesnar's not Goldberg. That's stupid. A heel that needs to be protected with victories is a shit heel.

The list of guys who can do a ton of jobs and keep their drawing power isn't a long one.

[El-P]

Oh come on, Lesnar's not Goldberg. That's stupid. A heel that needs to be protected with victories is a shit heel.

There's a happy medium between "needs to be protected with victories" and "losing your very first match clean to what should have been the big money feud".

[Phil Schneider]

Lesner leaped face first into a chain that split his head open. That kind of flash victory is the only one that makes sense. The venn diagram of "guys whining about the finish" and "guys who are fucking idiots" overlap almost completely so that makes me even more confident it was a good idea.

[Exposer]

Anyone watch this in the presence of super casual fans? I'm curious what the masses thought of a main event that sounds like it was worked in a different style.

Yes, my father was hilarious throughout. He started yelling and cheering for Cena to low blow Brock and fight back after the initial exchange. When Brock attacked a ref, dad screamed and started saying that Brock has to be fined $500,000 and permanently suspended. I had to remind him that Ace agreed to not punish Brock for stuff like that. He totally went nuts through the entire thing. It was entertaining as hell.

[Ricky Jackson]

I love how Cena's loss to Tensai has suddenly been revised in some fans' minds as being a clean loss. It wasn't.

[Boondocks Kernoodle]

The venn diagram of "guys whining about the finish" and "guys who are fucking idiots" overlap almost completely so that makes me even more confident it was a good idea.

You bring such a wonderful attitude to this board.

 

I think the losing streak storyline for Cena was an interesting one and if he really is going to be out for a while, it would have made sense to bring up the car wreck that he was in a couple of months ago and have him do an interview from his hospital bed talking about how that accident hurt him more than he wanted to admit to himself but after toughing it out through Mania and Extreme Rules, his body can't handle it any longer and he needs to take time off. I'm not saying Cena winning is unjustifiable, but it hurts the intrigue of a rematch with Brock. Certainly there's room for debate as to whether it was a good idea to have a guy you're paying $5 million a year lose in his first match, and there's nothing about taking the negative position on it that makes one a "fucking idiot."

[Dylan Waco]

There certainly is a debate to be had about it and I can see both sides. But the disciples of the Meltzerian gospel would have you believe such a debate is not only "wrong" to have but only those who viscerally hate the wrestling business could possibly think it was a good idea for Cena to win. Now I'm a guy who loved Jar Jar in Episode One both because he sounded like Dusty Rhodes and because I fucking hate Star Wars and I found it hilarious how outraged diehards were by his existence. The point is that I get wanting to ruin something you loathe and laughing at it from a far. But those who think Cena over Lesnar was a good idea (or even just not a bad idea) are not anti-fan's trolling/laughing at wrestling fans. They are real fans who just disagree. And yet almost as soon as people started defending the finish even in the most tepid ways imaginable the torches started firing up.

 

So rather than discuss the stupidity or lack thereof of those who feel one way or the other about the finish, I'd find it more interesting if people would actually talk about the finish and the thinking that went into, negatives/positives of it, et.

[Log]

Just gonna throw something out here...Lesnar also lost his first, much-hyped, MMA fight.

[El-P]

But the disciples of the Meltzerian gospel

 

That is so condescending it's ridiculous. God forbid someone would share the same opinion with the Meltz from time to time. Like people who think Cena winning is stupid are simply following Meltz's lead and not able to think by themselves. Remind me of that one when I drop the dreaded "trend" word next time around.

 

As far as discussing the finish, I think it's been said already, at least I'm pretty clear about it : as a match in a vacuum, everything worked great, loved the hell out of the match, have no issue with Cena winning. As far as booking long term, it's an abortion to have Cena beat Lesnar in his first match. There's not much else to say that hasn't been said already. And don't act like anyone pretended like nothing was worth discussing. Discussing and arguing is what we're doing since we all saw that match. I don't even get where you're coming from with that ridiculous "people who think it's a good idea are not true wrestling fan" stuff to be honest.

[Victator]

Until Lesnar decides to go play pro lacrosse and leaves you high and dry before the rematch.

 

I'm glad Cena won because fuck the visitors. Home fucking Team.

[Dylan Waco]

But the disciples of the Meltzerian gospel

 

That is so condescending it's ridiculous. God forbid someone would share the same opinion with the Meltz from time to time. Like people who think Cena winning is stupid are simply following Meltz's lead and not able to think by themselves. Remind me of that one when I drop the dreaded "trend" word next time around.

 

As far as discussing the finish, I think it's been said already, at least I'm pretty clear about it : as a match in a vacuum, everything worked great, loved the hell out of the match, have no issue with Cena winning. As far as booking long term, it's an abortion to have Cena beat Lesnar in his first match. There's not much else to say that hasn't been said already. And don't act like anyone pretended like nothing was worth discussing. Discussing and arguing is what we're doing since we all saw that match. I don't even get where you're coming from with that ridiculous "people who think it's a good idea are not true wrestling fan" stuff to be honest.

 

Considering the fact that you are easily the most condescending and pretentious person I've ever encountered on a wrestling message board I take this as a great compliment.

 

The "people who think it's a good idea are not true wrestling fans" point is something I have seen expressed multiple times elsewhere.

 

I don't give a fuck if people share Dave's opinion. Hell I agree with Dave on many things. But when people start rolling out "I agree with the top journalist ever!" talking point or literally taking the words out of his mouth verbatim without attribution - both of which are things I have seen on multiple boards since last night - it is clear that they are shaping their argument as if it received wisdom from a messianic figure that only heretics and heathens could oppose.

 

The point though is actually that this whole thing speaks to the massive divide in wrestling geek culture as both sides immediately go into defensive posturing mode the second something like this comes up. I'm certainly as guilty of it as anyone.

[Robert S]

They began Lesnar's PPV run with the blow-off match, this is Russo-booking 101. When has this ever worked in pro wrestling history?

I cannot accept the finish as Lesnar slipping on a banana peel. Cena transitioned into offense using a chain shot and beat Lesnar with an AA on a gimmick. This is standard WWE gimmick match finish and not one guy being lucky.

I mean I can see several possible reason for them putting Cena over:

(1) They are afraid Lesnar will pull out of the deal sooner or later so get someone beating Lesnar while he is here.

(2) They did not want to have Cena lose in two big PPV main events in a row.

(3) Everybody expected Lesnar going over, so they did the opposite.

To me only (1) is a valid reason for this finish.

[El-P]

Considering the fact that you are easily the most condescending and pretentious person I've ever encountered on a wrestling message board I take this as a great compliment.

Yeah, whatever.

 

The "people who think it's a good idea are not true wrestling fans" point is something I have seen expressed multiple times elsewhere.

So, answer to those people directly, but no one here expressed that point of view (which is a stupid one indeed).

 

I don't give a fuck if people share Dave's opinion. Hell I agree with Dave on many things. But when people start rolling out "I agree with the top journalist ever!" talking point or literally taking the words out of his mouth verbatim without attribution - both of which are things I have seen on multiple boards since last night - it is clear that they are shaping their argument as if it received wisdom from a messianic figure that only heretics and heathens could oppose.

Again, has this happened on this very board ? Hum... don't think so. So blaming people around here for an attitude that really hasn't been displayed here is pretty off the mark I would say. Without trying to sound condescending nor pretentious. I'm doing my best. I'm trying.

 

(meanwhile, some talks about "fucking idiots" because they disagree. Quite defensive indeed.)

[Dylan Waco]

4) they are trying to mimic Brock's MMA run entirely and the story is going to be that he made a mistake by working a pro wrestling match after dominating Cena with MMA tactics.

5) they see more money in Brock chasing Cena, than Cena chasing Brock (this sounds stupid to some, but in a fucked up way I think it's not nutty at all)

6) Brock wanted to show he was willing to "do business"

[Dylan Waco]

Considering the fact that you are easily the most condescending and pretentious person I've ever encountered on a wrestling message board I take this as a great compliment.

Yeah, whatever.

 

The "people who think it's a good idea are not true wrestling fans" point is something I have seen expressed multiple times elsewhere.

So, answer to those people directly, but no one here expressed that point of view (which is a stupid one indeed).

 

I don't give a fuck if people share Dave's opinion. Hell I agree with Dave on many things. But when people start rolling out "I agree with the top journalist ever!" talking point or literally taking the words out of his mouth verbatim without attribution - both of which are things I have seen on multiple boards since last night - it is clear that they are shaping their argument as if it received wisdom from a messianic figure that only heretics and heathens could oppose.

Again, has this happened on this very board ? Hum... don't think so. So blaming people around here for an attitude that really hasn't been displayed here is pretty off the mark I would say. Without trying to sound condescending nor pretentious. I'm doing my best. I'm trying.

 

(meanwhile, some talks about "fucking idiots" because they disagree. Quite defensive indeed.)

 

I wasn't accusing a single person on this board of a thing. You can't find a single reference to that in my post, nor was it implied.

 

My point was that while Phil's comment may have come across as prickish, there have been a metric shit ton of prickish comments coming from the other side all over the net.

 

I would prefer we not go that route and didn't really think Phil's line was necessary which was the entire point of my last statement in my original post.

[El-P]

I wasn't accusing a single person on this board of a thing. You can't find a single reference to that in my post, nor was it implied.

I thought it was implied since it came as a follow-up to us discussing back and forth about the issue. If it wasn't, I apologize for the "condescending" line.

 

My point was that while Phil's comment may have come across as prickish, there have been a metric shit ton of prickish comments coming from the other side all over the net.

 

I would prefer we not go that route and didn't really think Phil's line was necessary which was the entire point of my last statement in my original post.

Ok then.

[Robert S]

4) they are trying to mimic Brock's MMA run entirely and the story is going to be that he made a mistake by working a pro wrestling match after dominating Cena with MMA tactics.

5) they see more money in Brock chasing Cena, than Cena chasing Brock (this sounds stupid to some, but in a fucked up way I think it's not nutty at all)

6) Brock wanted to show he was willing to "do business"

Point 6 sounds ridiculous. Point 4+5 might work under the right circumstances, but I don't think last nights finish can be compared in the least with getting caught with a flash kneebar submission. Lesnar lost a WWE gimmick match in WWE blow-off fashion. There are other things not fitting this idea too: if somehow they make this story work they will have a (second) blow-off match which according to that story would be all about Lesnar, who would leave the WWE after that match. That would mean that they would put themselves in the same corner that they did with this years WM main event.

[Dylan Waco]

I don't really buy point six, but it's been tossed out enough and would not totally shock me.

[El-P]

Why would Lesnar have issues to do business anyway ? He's getting millions, and he doesn't care much about pro-wrestling to begin with. Lesnar doesn't have a history of refusing to do jobs, does he ?

[cm funk]

I think they're trying to tell a very simple story here

 

Cena is the franchise, the face of WWE, the guy who lives and breathes and bleeds the blood of the company. He loses to The Rock, he doesn't get his "passing of the torch" moment, but he lives to fight another day. Now he's thrust into the role of defending the company against the invading outsider, the man who's come to rape and pillage the company and doesn't care about anything but himself.

 

WM was hyped up as the match that Cena "can't lose," that he needs to win for personal validation, this is the match that Cena has to win not just for himself but for the company. Cena wins the battle with Brock, but it's a Pyrrhic victory. The match leaves him broken and battered, forces him out of the ring. What's a 3 count mean if you get the shit kicked out of you and end up on the shelf? Cena is losing the war.

 

In the meantime, without Cena around to keep him in check, Lesnar goes on a path of destruction. He injures and maims people. He beats Orton. He takes Punk's title. The question is posited, "who can possibly stop Brock Lesnar?"

 

John Cena. After Brock has destroyed everyone, John Cena will ride to the rescue.

 

If it plays out like that I think it's good, basic storytelling. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, which usually ends up with me looking stupid, but right now I don't disagree with Cena winning the match. Brock is going to be a regular character for the next year and they're doing variations on Cena's superhero booking to try and keep his character fresh, I think it's interesting.

 

I'm guessing that when Brock signed is when they decided to have Cena lose at WM and go in this direction.