Better In-Ring Performer - Hogan or Cena?

[Negro Suave]

Its an interesting question. A lot of the differences between them lie in the attitude. Hulk Hogan has always acted as if he knew that he was the face of wrestling and worked accordingly, whereas John Cena has always acted like I have been MADE the face of WWE and has acted accordingly.

 

Wrestling wise they are both near the bottom of the technical pool when placed nexted to their contemporaries int that they are not the worst but no where near the best. The one thing that Hogan has managed to do that always fascinated me, is that in any match, he could get the crowd going just by stopping and looking at them. I haven't seen Cena able to pull that off believably.

 

Objectively however I'd go with Cena, as he's been more a facillitator rather than a gatekeeper in the main event picture

[El-P]

Hulk Hogan has always acted as if he knew that he was the face of wrestling and worked accordingly, whereas John Cena has always acted like I have been MADE the face of WWE and has acted accordingly.

That's an interesting remark. I agree Cena has "brand" tatooed on his forehead, whereas Hogan looked like he was bigger than wrestling itself. The fact he was a big star in AWA and New Japan before going to WWF probably helps.

[Jingus]

Patterson vs Anderson! The guys laying out the big matches matter.

That's something which doesn't get talked about nearly enough, mostly because it's pretty hard to determine who came up with what ideas. Can anyone look at any WWE match and definitively be able to tell which agent laid it out? Or which of the much-derided anonymous Hollywood writers scripted any particular promo? That kind of backstage knowledge is rarely explained even by the dirtsheets. And I think our ignorance of how it works makes smarks reluctant to discuss it or acknowledge just how incredibly damned important it is.

 

the Rude comparison is really a shitty one because Rude was getting the desired response in front of record low attendance. I love Rude in 92 - literally one of my favorite years any U.S. based wrestler ever had. But he obviously WASN'T doing his job as the companies top heel if that job is to make money.

Yeah. Drawing new people into a building and satisfying or manipulating the people who are already in the building are two entirely different skills. Broadcasting a product to a mass audience isn't the same thing as narrowcasting a product which is specifically tailored to a small base of hardcore fans. It's the difference between WWF/WCW and ECW/ROH.

 

Man I do not like Mania V at all because fuck the finish to hell.

Ditto. The body of the match is fine, but when Hogan gets up and hits the Standardized Hogan Finishing Sequence it makes me not care at all. You can tell whenever Hulk actually cares about making a match different from usual, because the finish won't be "kick out of a finisher, Hulk Up, no-sell a few punches, block a punch, three punches, Irish whip, big boot, leg drop".

[sek69]

Patterson vs Anderson! The guys laying out the big matches matter.

That's something which doesn't get talked about nearly enough, mostly because it's pretty hard to determine who came up with what ideas. Can anyone look at any WWE match and definitively be able to tell which agent laid it out? Or which of the much-derided anonymous Hollywood writers scripted any particular promo? That kind of backstage knowledge is rarely explained even by the dirtsheets. And I think our ignorance of how it works makes smarks reluctant to discuss it or acknowledge just how incredibly damned important it is.

 

 

 

 

I don't know who does each match, but one of the more noticeable things has been how different matches are laid out since Patterson retired. He gets credit for being great, but its even more telling that since he left you really only see that kind of THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MATCH kind of layout when it involves long term guys like HHH/HBK/Taker who are largely left to handle their own stuff. You can say all you want about the writers and booking, but WWE seemingly not being able to hire anyone who can lay things out worth a damn since Pat left has been their biggest shortcoming.

[Loss]

Matches can be laid out brilliantly, but Pat/Arn can't wrestle for them.

 

By the way, Negro Suave's post about Hogan/Cena is hard to argue and I agree with it. I think it's the most effective pro-Hogan argument.

[NintendoLogic]

I think Cena's first year in the WWE is crucial toward understanding his overall mindset. He was set to be future endeavored until Stephanie discovered that he could rap. Then he worked a white rapper gimmick despite a lot of people being against it because they thought he had the potential to be a big money player and the gimmick would permanently brand him as a comedy midcarder. I think the overall lesson he drew is that going along to get along is the way to go.

[Matt D]

Matches can be laid out brilliantly, but Pat/Arn can't wrestle for them.

 

By the way, Negro Suave's post about Hogan/Cena is hard to argue and I agree with it. I think it's the most effective pro-Hogan argument.

What maters more? What happens in the match or how it's executed?

[Loss]

How it's executed.

[Matt D]

I made it black and white, but i doubt it is. There are different elements of execution. Timing is way more important to me than believable strikes/contact/stiffness for instance.

[Loss]

Well yeah, timing is part of execution. The point is that anyone can come up with a great idea, us included. But it doesn't mean much until it actually happens, and wow I sound like middle management.

[Matt D]

You're an empiricist and i'm a theorist, I guess.*

 

I have no idea if that's accurate.