The WTF!?! Have they lost their minds?! thread

[Mr Wrestling X]

Let's start of with the most recentone - Brock Lesnar losing clean to John Cena at Extreme Rules in his first match back.

 

So many people are confounded about this and simply can't fathom the logic (and neither could I until it happened, since I couldn't actually think of any scenario where Cena would go over) that Lesnar lost. I think ultimately it comes down to two things - Brock being a good sport and voluntary taking a loss, perhaps to appease his detractors who are pissed that he's just turned up and been pushed to the moon, or then there is the possibility that Lesnar doesn't care whether he wins or loses because he's being paid a ludicrous amount of money to work a fraction of the dates that the rest of the WWE roster does. You also have to add to this the fact that WWE wants to get a Wrestlemania match vs. Rock, Cena or Undertaker out of Lesnar and you have the reasons for him essentially squashing Cena but ultimately losing.

 

I personally think the former is true because WWE have made a significant investment on Lesnar and surely want to keep him happy whilst he is under contract. Say what you want, but I don't think Lesnar cares JUST about the money, I think there is a very real possibility that he actually wants to make his second stint with WWE work. I say this because despite being in excellent physical health, he is past the prime stage for the majority of athletic sports, his bouts of diverticulitis impacted upon his MMA career and took away the momentum that he went into the sport with and therefore professional wrestling is all that he is left with (although it's not like he's going to go broke considering he was making over a million dollars for most of his UFC matches)

 

Thoughts?

 

(and absolutely feel free to post your analysis of questionable booking decisions)

[MikeCampbell]

The way I put it my best friend last night, Brock losing the match is pretty much a footnote. Brock kicked Cena's ass in a way that's never been seen before, he busted him open. Brock may have put Cena on the shelf with his left arm being hurt. Oh, BTW, Cena wound up winning.

[ohtani's jacket]

You'd think this was Starrcade '97 the way people are going on about it.

 

Personally, I thought it made more sense to have Brock lose than job Cena out. If Cena is leaving for a few months, you can build Brock up and then have Cena return as the guy who beat him last time out.

[Mr Wrestling X]

^ Ah, but people will argue that the "usual way" is to have the heel (Lesnar) take out the face and win the match in such a way that the face (Cena) has an excuse to explain their absence - leading to the heel bragging about taking out the face until the face returns and they resume their feud.

 

I'm really surprised that WWE allowed Cena and Lesnar to blade in that match, given that the ban on intentional bleeding is part of the deal between WWE and Mattel (which is a very important deal for WWE). Hell, not even Triple H and Undertaker were allowed to blade at WM and that really says something about how important getting Lesnar over as a monster (again) is to WWE, to the point that they'd risk the ire of one of their most important business associates.

[El-P]

Personally, I thought it made more sense to have Brock lose than job Cena out. If Cena is leaving for a few months, you can build Brock up and then have Cena return as the guy who beat him last time out.

Hum, what ? Doesn't make a lick of sense. Cena is leaving. Traditionnal wrestling booking : guy leaving because the heel destroyed him. Babyface comes back several months after and gets his revenge. It's easy, it's simple.

Now, Brock has already been beaten. He's not that special anymore, I don't care what anybody says. If at least Lesnar had beaten up Cena after the win and the show ended with a bloody Lesnar triumphant, a foot on Cena's carcass, then I would agree the loss wouldn't matter than much. There Cena won, KOed Lesnar, cut his cute promo, Lesnar was nowhere to be seen. End of story. Now you have to *re-build* Brock ? Well, that is poor booking no matter how you twist it.

[Loss]

Rock winning at Mania bothered me more than Cena winning here, for what it's worth.

[ohtani's jacket]

Personally, I thought it made more sense to have Brock lose than job Cena out. If Cena is leaving for a few months, you can build Brock up and then have Cena return as the guy who beat him last time out.

Hum, what ? Doesn't make a lick of sense. Cena is leaving. Traditionnal wrestling booking : guy leaving because the heel destroyed him. Babyface comes back several months after and gets his revenge. It's easy, it's simple.

Now, Brock has already been beaten. He's not that special anymore, I don't care what anybody says. If at least Lesnar had beaten up Cena after the win and the show ended with a bloody Lesnar triumphant, a foot on Cena's carcass, then I would agree the loss wouldn't matter than much. There Cena won, KOed Lesnar, cut his cute promo, Lesnar was nowhere to be seen. End of story. Now you have to *re-build* Brock ? Well, that is poor booking no matter how you twist it.

 

Cena isn't a traditional babyface. He gets booed a lot. By having him do badass things and beat Brock he can come back stronger than if Brock had put him on the shelf. I bet he gets a better reaction when he returns than he would have if he'd jobbed. His cred got a major injection from this match and month long feud. It was an interesting reversal of conventional booking.

[El-P]

So basically you say that was Cena's "Dreamer takes ten cane shots and He's Hardcore He's Hardcore He's Hardcore" moment ? 5-6 years into his reign of being The Man in the WWE, do you think that will shake up things that much when he comes back ? I'm very doubtful.

You're giving WWE way too much credit here when you talk about reversal of conventionnal booking. It's just the usual "let's run through a feud because we don't have any patience and can't book long term". In other words : stupid booking.

[Slasher]

Rock winning at Mania bothered me more than Cena winning here, for what it's worth.

That would have killed Miami dead.

[El-P]

So, you've got :

 

_THE Invasion

_Starrcade 97

_Nash beats Goldberg and ends the streak

_Hash beats Takada just a few months after Takada got the IWGP belt

_Lesnar losing his first match back to Cena in a post WM B-PPV

_David Arquette, WCW champ

_fucking up Bret vs Vince with stupid overbooking

[NintendoLogic]

I thought Cena and Lesnar bled hardway.

[ohtani's jacket]

So basically you say that was Cena's "Dreamer takes ten cane shots and He's Hardcore He's Hardcore He's Hardcore" moment ? 5-6 years into his reign of being The Man in the WWE, do you think that will shake up things that much when he comes back ? I'm very doubtful.

You're giving WWE way too much credit here when you talk about reversal of conventionnal booking. It's just the usual "let's run through a feud because we don't have any patience and can't book long term". In other words : stupid booking.

They probably thought everybody thinks Brock should win so let's book the opposite, but that's still a reversal of conventional booking. How much effect it has depends on how Brock is used. If Brock becomes the dominant guy then Cena's return will be a bigger deal (presuming that he's going away.) It's all in how you present it.

[Ricky Jackson]

They did bleed hardway.

 

I think it is way, way too soon to compare last night's result to classic WWE screw ups. (Or post a picture of money burning...ha,ha so funny Chico). Based on the buzz in the air surrounding the match--mostly a positive "Holy shit did you see that match?" response-- I don't see how the result can be considered a bad thing. Only the hardest of the hardcores are talking about bad booking and money being thrown away. I think most wrestling fans feel that last night WWE pulled off something unique and want to see how it all plays out.

[CodySave]

The fact that people are raising such a big stink about Lesnar losing proves that some fans just don't pay attention to anything but surface level detail in wrestling right now.

 

Even in losing, Lesnar did more in that match to comes across as the meanest, baddest competitor in WWE right now than anyone who has a WON a match has all year.

 

Cena took massive punishment from Lesnar throughout the match, unlike we've seen anyone take in years. But, look at the final sequence of events that caused Lesnar to lose:

 

- Lesnar leaps over the steps in the middle of the ring with way too much momentum, Cena actually lowbridge's the rope out of instinct to avoid an even worse collision, they both fall to the floor with Lesnar getting the worst end - he does a flip tumbling to the arena floor and lands hard on his knee. Granted, when he ist able to stand up, he raises his arms and smiles, but I think this dramatic botch amplified the drama even more.

 

- Lesnar sets up the same leaping move, only this time Cena crushes him in the face with a steel chain punch while Lesnar is in the air. Lesnar is now bleeding badly from his forehead.

 

- With Lesnar now dazed, Cena slams him hard onto the steel ring steps and pins him on the steps.

 

Now, how the hell wouldn't anyone lose after all that in the final 2 minutes?

 

It took a monstrous effort and a dose of "right place, right time" for Cena to put the monster away. And Cena clearly looked like he took the much worse ass kicking after the match, but the fact he was able to pull out a win makes him look super tough, while Brock still looks a destructive force. They both win.

 

There's lots of ways they can go with this booking wise between Lesnar and Johnny Ace.

 

Hell, one other neat side story is it took the third ref of the match to count the fall, and technically both Lesnar's shoulders weren't down on the steps - the first ref was bumped out and Lesnar crushed the second with a frustration clothesline.

 

Lesnar can go so far as to claim it was a team effort to keep him down and this can go so far as to be changed into a "MMA vs. Wrestling" angle if they really wanted too right now, which would be new and fresh. A friend pointed out to me that both Rampage Jackson and Tito Ortiz's contracts are up and they told UFC that they have other opportunities to explore...hmm. Both have both expressed interest in wrestling.

[Frankensteiner]

Personally, I thought it made more sense to have Brock lose than job Cena out. If Cena is leaving for a few months, you can build Brock up and then have Cena return as the guy who beat him last time out.

Hum, what ? Doesn't make a lick of sense. Cena is leaving. Traditionnal wrestling booking : guy leaving because the heel destroyed him. Babyface comes back several months after and gets his revenge. It's easy, it's simple.

Now, Brock has already been beaten. He's not that special anymore, I don't care what anybody says. If at least Lesnar had beaten up Cena after the win and the show ended with a bloody Lesnar triumphant, a foot on Cena's carcass, then I would agree the loss wouldn't matter than much. There Cena won, KOed Lesnar, cut his cute promo, Lesnar was nowhere to be seen. End of story. Now you have to *re-build* Brock ? Well, that is poor booking no matter how you twist it.

 

Cena isn't a traditional babyface. He gets booed a lot. By having him do badass things and beat Brock he can come back stronger than if Brock had put him on the shelf. I bet he gets a better reaction when he returns than he would have if he'd jobbed. His cred got a major injection from this match and month long feud. It was an interesting reversal of conventional booking.

 

It's not going to change anything. Didn't Cena do some "badass things" in his feuds with Umaga, Orton, and Edge? People don't boo Cena because they perceive a lack of toughness; they boo him because he's such lame character. Cena will come back as the same smiley, happy Cena with terrible humor and forced delivery. Any cheers he might receive initially will fade once people quickly realize the character is still the same.

[Coffey]

I'll be the one to say it. Not ironically, not speaking through hyperbole, John Cena winning last night was the worst business decision that WWE has ever made. In the history of pro-wrestling, it's up there with giving away Goldberg/Hogan on free TV in terms of squandered potential revenue.

 

And that's if we just look at it in a vacuum as just a match outcome, while ignoring things like John Cena looking at the camera, post-match, smiling and literally saying "I'm OK!"

 

They paid Brock Lesnar, a guy doing 1 million buys in UFC, $5 million to come in, get hot-shot against the top guy in the first month, and then lose clean in the middle (I guess you can argue the "clean" part). So he's just like everyone else now.

 

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It would be an entire chapter in a "death of WWE" book.

[El-P]

They probably thought everybody thinks Brock should win so let's book the opposite, but that's still a reversal of conventional booking.

aka Russo booking : "They believe we'll do this so we'll do the opposite because..... because we'll do the opposite".

[Mr Wrestling X]

They did bleed hardway.

I honestly can't see it, there is no way in hell that John Cena (the real life person, not the character) could take several forceful elbow, hammerfists and closed-fist punches from an MMA heavyweight (and a UFC world champion no less) - known for knocking the likes of Randy Couture and Frank Mir silly - and come away coherent, balanced and with a strategically placed cut that happened to stop bleeding pretty quickly (cuts suffered in MMA matches tend to require stiches and staples). On the same hand, there is no way that Brock Lesnar could take a forceful chain-assisted punch to the forehead (where the cut was located) and not be completely knocked out cold! Hell, he'd be lucky not to have concussion and a fractured forehead!

 

I could go with the bust lip that Cena suffered in the brawl being hardway as the result of a botch (with little force behind it), but there is no way that the blood in the Extreme Rules match was hardway.

[Dylan Waco]

I'll be the one to say it. Not ironically, not speaking through hyperbole, John Cena winning last night was the worst business decision that WWE has ever made. In the history of pro-wrestling, it's up there with giving away Goldberg/Hogan on free TV in terms of squandered potential revenue.

It wasn't even the worst business decision the WWE has made in the last few months.

 

I honestly cannot believe the rage people have over this finish. I can see thinking it was the wrong thing and in a sense I agree that it was. I can see thinking the mixture of MMA spots in with pro wrestling is a slippery slope that could be FAR worse for business than the finish. But saying this finish was "the worst finish of all time" or on the level of Sting/Hogan or "the worst business decision that WWE has ever made" is something I literally cannot wrap my head around.

 

Of course I also think the notion that Brock being a huge MMA draw will make him a huge wrestling draw is ass backwards too so what do I know?

[El-P]

I don't think it's nowhere near Sting/Hogan, Nash beating Goldberg or the Invasion angle. But it's still really really stupid. I honestly didn't believe for one second that Cena would win that match beforehand. SO yeah, they swerved me. Hooray ! You got me WWE. Now ? Well, I'm excited to watch other Brock Lesnar match because that one was so awesome, but Lesnar already lost his luster as a monster now, so I'm not really excited to know what will happen next. Just throw some matches and I'll watch hoping it'll be fun.

[Dylan Waco]

Honestly I don't think for a second Cena won to swerve people. I think Cena won for a variety of reasons, some stupid, some smarter than a lot of us would like to admit.

 

There are a lot of people who hate Cena and for some reason think he is always booked incredibly strong. I have no clue how anyone watching over the course of the last year could come to that conclusion, but they do. Someone made this point elsewhere, but I honestly believe if Punk had beaten Lesnar the outrage coming from some quarters would be FAR less than it is (for the record I'm not saying that about you El-P, and I think Alvarez and Meltz would have flipped their shit no matter what).

 

In some respects I think the right thing to do would have been for Lesnar to come in and destroy Punk first, but then the criticism would be that it was the WWE bringing in an outsider with short term value to crush the guy that has finally broken into the top tier.

 

To be honest I don't know if there is a right way to book with the baggage Lesnar has, particularly with the current crop of WWE faces being what they are (after Punk and Cena every one seems beneath him).

[El-P]

Honestly I don't think for a second Cena won to swerve people. I think Cena won for a variety of reasons, some stupid, some smarter than a lot of us would like to admit.

I actually agree. I only brought up Russo because Dan was saying in was "interesting reversal booking". I doubt that was the actual reason. We can think of many others.

 

There are a lot of people who hate Cena and for some reason think he is always booked incredibly strong. I have no clue how anyone watching over the course of the last year could come to that conclusion, but they do. Someone made this point elsewhere, but I honestly believe if Punk had beaten Lesnar the outrage coming from some quarters would be FAR less than it is (for the record I'm not saying that about you El-P, and I think Alvarez and Meltz would have flipped their shit no matter what).

Again, I agree. Punk is an internet darling, so we know how things work. I for one feared a shitty match to begin with. I got an awesome match that was more fun than anything I watched in ten years coming from WWE, so it's not like I have any reason to flip out other than the idiotic booking.

[Sean Liska]

I'll be the one to say it. Not ironically, not speaking through hyperbole, John Cena winning last night was the worst business decision that WWE has ever made.

 

Nothing can ever compare to the Invasion. It should have been the biggest angle in the history of the business, and it somehow caused WWE business to crash. The Invasion PPV is still the biggest non-Mania show in history by a healthy margin - that's how high the interest was.

[Jingus]

There are a lot of people who hate Cena and for some reason think he is always booked incredibly strong. I have no clue how anyone watching over the course of the last year could come to that conclusion, but they do.

It is weird how many people hate on Cena because "he never loses" or "he always comes back like Superman" or other similar statements. It's become a pretty solid consensus opinion in a lot of corners of the IWC. Why is that? He's nowhere near as protected as, say, Austin or Hogan were during their big runs. Cena usually does more clean jobs in a single year than those guys did in their entire championship reigns. Have modern fans just become so impatient, or so used to even-steven booking where everyone loses all the time, that they expect even the biggest stars to lose more frequently?

[ohtani's jacket]

I don't think it's nowhere near Sting/Hogan, Nash beating Goldberg or the Invasion angle. But it's still really really stupid. I honestly didn't believe for one second that Cena would win that match beforehand. SO yeah, they swerved me. Hooray ! You got me WWE. Now ? Well, I'm excited to watch other Brock Lesnar match because that one was so awesome, but Lesnar already lost his luster as a monster now, so I'm not really excited to know what will happen next. Just throw some matches and I'll watch hoping it'll be fun.

What would they have done with Brock if he'd won that they can't do anyway? The loss to Cena will be a chink in Brock's armour that they can exploit down the road. The idea that Lesnar can't be interesting now is preposterous. Was Vader any less interesting after he lost to Ron Simmons?