WrestleMania 31...

[tigerpride]

 

I think all the bitching about the booking of the main event and Rusev v. Cena really misses the bigger point, which is that the real problem with the booking is macro not micro. I completely disagree with Jerry and cm funk on the Rusev thing, but I get that the presentation of the feud made a Cena win almost a given, and I can see their argument.

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?

 

Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South?

 

I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried.

 

Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over.

 

EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic.

 

 

Cena's had one high profile loss. At the Rumble, he wasn't even pissed.

 

In 2008, Cena jobbed clean at Mania to Orton, and was pinned by Orton again at Backlash. He then jobbed clean to JBL at Great American Bash and to Batista at Summerslam.

 

That's four high profile losses and he seemed to do okay.

[Dylan Waco]

 

I think all the bitching about the booking of the main event and Rusev v. Cena really misses the bigger point, which is that the real problem with the booking is macro not micro. I completely disagree with Jerry and cm funk on the Rusev thing, but I get that the presentation of the feud made a Cena win almost a given, and I can see their argument.

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?

 

Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South?

 

I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried.

 

Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over.

 

EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic.

 

 

This is where not following wrestling or the modern product absolutely cripples you in these arguments.

 

There was absolutely an argument for Cena to win, and the way the story was built coming into the show it was the "right" thing to do in the moment. But the number one problem with the modern WWE is the complete and utter failure to capitalize on an acts momentum and create new stars. I have been on record talking about the unselfishness of Cena before - there is no question that what he let Brock do to him is something no other ace would have done - but Cena beating Rusev, especially the way he beat Rusev, just continues the companies streak of not capitalizing on hot acts and creating new stars.

 

Wins and losses do matter, which is why on the biggest show you should try and book based on who has the most to gain. Cena gained absolutely nothing at all from the win. Rusev would have been a made man. Now he's on the Bray Wyatt track, with no obvious next opponent (none of the over faces can really afford a loss right now), a potential split with his manager, and a probable continuation of a feud that he almost certainly isn't going to come back and win.

 

In a world with talent rotating in and out of territories a Rusev loss absolutely would have been the right thing. In this world, with WWE's problems being what they are, it's just another star that wasn't created.

[Loss]

Parv, the modern paradox is that they need everyone to have long-term value more than ever, yet they book for the short term more than ever.

[Dylan Waco]

 

This is an aside, but I don't see any evidence to support the theory that Cena would have been a bigger draw with full on face reactions v. Mixed reactions.

 

Wouldn't one expect more merchandise sales if his crowd reactions were more uniformly positive?

 

 

I think this is a bad thing to point to as Cena has been a merchandise machine. Hard to imagine he would have been any more or less popular in that regard if he was getting full face reactions.

[Badlittlekitten]

Have mixed feelings about Mania this year. In isolation it was a great show that far surpassed my (low) expectations. The Mizdow/Show stand off, Flair chopping Steamboat, THAT Rusev entrance and the brutal, brilliant main event were among the highlights. Even HHH/Sting was fun as a nostalgic wankfest. I only ended up skipping Bray/Taker and the Divs but the crowd seemed hot throughout. Know nothing about Rousey but she felt like a bigger star than any woman has in 15 years. As a stand alone event it was fun and the results felt perfectly satisfying.

 

But it does little to heighten my interest going forward.

[NintendoLogic]

I'm shocked that anyone thought that any result other than Cena going over was even remotely plausible. How many promotions in history have had evil foreign heels win feuds against patriotic tippy-top babyfaces? Even Stevie Wonder could see the writing on the wall once they went all-in on the USA vs. Russia storyline.

[Dylan Waco]

Who here argued that Cena WASN'T going to go over? I knew Cena would win, said so here, said so in every public forum. I don't know ANYONE who thought Rusev would win.

[cm funk]

 

Seth has been presented as a guy who can hang with anyone (including Brock Lesnar) and beat anyone at any given time......but he's chosen to take the sleazy eazy HEEL side of doing things. He's constantly put over as an amazing athlete, amazing wrestler....who shouldn't have to resort to such cheap tactics.....who doesn't need to cozy up to The Authority.......that's the whole character right now. Shades of Owen Hart kinda......where it was always "this guy is so talented......he doesn't need to be such a heel" and it was like.....because he can, and because he enjoys it.

 

The announcers and the talking heads constantly put this over......which one would assume is laying ground for an eventual babyface run

 

 

It's one thing to be a chickensh%t heel, it's another to be a chickensh%t heel who never wins. The wins on PPV aren't there. But I suppose this isn't specific to Rollins. Every guy who wins MITB gets to do jobs until he cashes in. I get the idea in building interest in future match-ups, but I could do without guys being figuratively neutered before they get their title run.

 

 

 

well yeah, I agree 100% on that, he's done way too many jobs......but you can say that about practically everyone on the roster. Hell, Roman Reigns was doing jobs on TV going into Mania. Other than Rusev the only other guy who didn't do a job on TV this year so far was Bray F'n Wyatt who beat Bryan in Bryan's first match back (so stupid) tossed Bryan from the Rumble (again, so stupid) because he was being protected for Undertaker.

[cm funk]

Actually, I can't remember the last time Wyatt was actually pinned in a match. He lost the first match with Jericho then beat him 2 or 3 times after. He won every single match with Dean Ambrose (which did Dean zero favors)......he's never lost to Bryan. Other than Cena and Jericho and now Taker who has he lost to? He's been insanely protected in a company where most guys are 50/50 and even the top guys do jobs

[tigerpride]

Dean Ambrose beat him in a boot camp match for Tribute to The Troops

[Benbeeach]

Main event was just as good on the rewatch, finish and all

[fakeplastictrees]

Actually, I can't remember the last time Wyatt was actually pinned in a match. He lost the first match with Jericho then beat him 2 or 3 times after. He won every single match with Dean Ambrose (which did Dean zero favors)......he's never lost to Bryan. Other than Cena and Jericho and now Taker who has he lost to? He's been insanely protected in a company where most guys are 50/50 and even the top guys do jobs

 

They traded wins during a series of 7 matches with Ambrose winning the last in the series (I believe). It was an UN-announced best of seven series or perhaps I am giving WWE too much credit for its even-steven booking.

[pantherwagner]

Rock/Rousey segment was too long but this is the first time in 15+ years that I have seen anything by WWE that makes them look like a cool company that is relevant and has got the pulse on what’s happening in the world today. Seriously, this is the stuff that makes people care. If they play this right it may not be a complete game changer like Cindy Lauper, Mr. T or Tyson (nowadays it’s much harder to hit a nerve like that again) but it could easily be their fourth biggest celeb coup ever.

HHH and Stephanie could get extra points for being visionaries if they can put this one together… even though the truth is that they lucked out that she’s making a movie with Rocky and that one of her best friends is such a wrestling geek that she wouldn’t look out of place at all in this board.

The interesting part will be how a star depressed UFC (that is even more in panic mode than WWE) reacts to this. They may be so scared to lose Ronda that they may just let her take a WM booking to keep her happy and let her cash in an “easy” few mill dollars

[hammerva]

The place looks incredible with this lighting.

 

I am convinced after being there live that either every Wrestlemania should either be on the Mountain/Pacific time zones or start the show at 5:00 EST. Yeah it was hot as balls and my face,back, and arms looked like Mike Shannahan skin coaching a couple years ago but it just look so great with the clear bright sun slowly morphing into the shade and into the light

[hammerva]

No, I don't. But I think people are being hypocritical because they like the outcome. What do you say to fans who wanted to see a winner and loser in a Brock Lesnar vs Roman Reigns match?

 

This is really confusing me. For the last 2 months nobody wanted to see Roman Reigns in a main event match against Brock Lesnar. A clean winner in the match for either one would have had terrible consequences (Reigns looking like a chump if he lost and the crowd completely destroying Reigns if he won).

 

It is almost like people are mad that Vince didn't continue the shitty booking that was laid out for the match. Damn it I was supposed to be disappointed by this main event and you didn't fulfill your obligations

 

Given that the build up for Wrestlemania has been just horrible, this was a great show. If any match really describes this PPV it was Triple H vs Sting. It was a very average wrestling match (hell awful until the hoopla began) that was made incredible live with the nostalgia act of D-X vs NWO.

 

If you hated this PPV then you better not even think of watching next year's show because it is going to be nothing but a really good version of "Heroes of Wrestling" with all the of "all star" matches that will be lined up

 

On a completely unrelated note, if the bay area is trying to get a Super Bowl at Levi's Stadium then they better think of an idea with parking because that place was a disaster in terms of parking and then getting out of the area. Hell even finding your parking lot was a pain in some places

[hammerva]

Who said anything about good or bad? I'm talking about people getting what they paid for.

 

Nobody goes to Wrestlemania for one match anymore. You are mostly going for the spectacle, the entire weekend, and the entire show.

 

I would agree with your argument if this was Extreme Rules because an entire show would be based on the match.

[JerryvonKramer]

 

 

I think all the bitching about the booking of the main event and Rusev v. Cena really misses the bigger point, which is that the real problem with the booking is macro not micro. I completely disagree with Jerry and cm funk on the Rusev thing, but I get that the presentation of the feud made a Cena win almost a given, and I can see their argument.

 

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?

Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South?

I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried.

Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over.

EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic.

Cena's had one high profile loss. At the Rumble, he wasn't even pissed.

 

In 2008, Cena jobbed clean at Mania to Orton, and was pinned by Orton again at Backlash. He then jobbed clean to JBL at Great American Bash and to Batista at Summerslam.

 

That's four high profile losses and he seemed to do okay.

The loss to Rusev at Fast Lane wasn't high profile?

 

 

 

I think all the bitching about the booking of the main event and Rusev v. Cena really misses the bigger point, which is that the real problem with the booking is macro not micro. I completely disagree with Jerry and cm funk on the Rusev thing, but I get that the presentation of the feud made a Cena win almost a given, and I can see their argument.

 

Since you completely disagree with me, can you explain how Cena is different from every other babyface ace in history?

Do you think Bruno or Hogan could have taken three high profile losses in less than a year? Jumbo? JYD down in Mid-South?

I don't see how or why people think that when it comes to Cena "losses don't matter". "Oh he's Cena, he can take it". Why? Auras fade when someone is jobbed out. Pedro Morales. He was un-beat-able. And an ace once upon a time. By 85 any aura he ever had is gone and buried.

Why is Cena different and why don't the fundamental rules of wrestling booking 101 apply to him? Sell me on that, and you sell me on Rusev going over.

EDIT: I actually wonder if this might be worth pulling out for its own topic.

This is where not following wrestling or the modern product absolutely cripples you in these arguments.

 

There was absolutely an argument for Cena to win, and the way the story was built coming into the show it was the "right" thing to do in the moment. But the number one problem with the modern WWE is the complete and utter failure to capitalize on an acts momentum and create new stars. I have been on record talking about the unselfishness of Cena before - there is no question that what he let Brock do to him is something no other ace would have done - but Cena beating Rusev, especially the way he beat Rusev, just continues the companies streak of not capitalizing on hot acts and creating new stars.

 

Wins and losses do matter, which is why on the biggest show you should try and book based on who has the most to gain. Cena gained absolutely nothing at all from the win. Rusev would have been a made man. Now he's on the Bray Wyatt track, with no obvious next opponent (none of the over faces can really afford a loss right now), a potential split with his manager, and a probable continuation of a feud that he almost certainly isn't going to come back and win.

 

In a world with talent rotating in and out of territories a Rusev loss absolutely would have been the right thing. In this world, with WWE's problems being what they are, it's just another star that wasn't created.

Okay, I get that Rusev needs to be made into a star. The concept I still don't understand is why people think Cena is bullet proof from losses.

 

Hogan during most of his WWF run had "nothing to gain" from most of his big wins. Royal Rumble 91 sticks out. He would have made big stars if he'd put any number of guys over. In the end he only put two people over: Warrior and Yokozuna. And the latter was an on the way out job and required lots of cheating. The loss to Andre was a screw job.

 

My point is only this: clearly Hogan, even at his height, wasn't bullet proof. He had "nothing to gain" for any single win. But he had "everything to lose", potentially, from any single loss.

 

I'm not arguing that Rusev didn't need the win. From the amount of money they spent on his entrance, it seems that they must have plans for him, because surely you don't invest in something like that for a guy who isn't going to be around. What I'm arguing is that this notion that Cena can just take losses and have it not affect him is completely alien to me and I'm not really convinced that the modern product being what it is has changed the baseline rules of how wrestling works. Look at Undertaker.

[kjh]

Rock/Rousey segment was too long but this is the first time in 15+ years that I have seen anything by WWE that makes them look like a cool company that is relevant and has got the pulse on what’s happening in the world today. Seriously, this is the stuff that makes people care. If they play this right it may not be a complete game changer like Cindy Lauper, Mr. T or Tyson (nowadays it’s much harder to hit a nerve like that again) but it could easily be their fourth biggest celeb coup ever.

 

It won't be a complete game changer because the match doesn't involve a rising star. There's no Hogan or Austin or even Lashley who become bigger mainstream stars out of this angle. It will do huge business on the night, but then everything will go back to normal as all the part-timers go back home for another year.

 

 

 

This is really confusing me. For the last 2 months nobody wanted to see Roman Reigns in a main event match against Brock Lesnar. A clean winner in the match for either one would have had terrible consequences (Reigns looking like a chump if he lost and the crowd completely destroying Reigns if he won).

 

I'm not sure WWE should be patted on the back for choosing the least worst option (given that they clearly wanted to keep Reigns a babyface and they didn't want to keep their top title iced till the summer) at their disposal, but lets not mistake this for great booking. The "surprise" Money In The Bank cash-in is a tired trope that makes new champions look weak. Reigns did lose, still looked like a chump and still got booed out of the building despite taking his beating like a man. They've got a direction that people won't care about till Brock gets back. It was a palatable finish, but didn't solve their big picture problems.

[Steenalized]

The loss to Rusev at Fastlane isn't high profile when you compare it to the rematch win at Wrestlemania. It's like when Brock jobbed to HHH at Mania then got the rubber match win at Extreme Rules. Wins/losses at Mania are a bigger deal than B shows.

[concrete1992]

To be fair Parv, it looked like they had plans for Bray Wyatt as well. Big spot against Cena at WrestleMania. One of the hottest acts in WWE at the time. Not a GREAT wrestler but could have great matches against the right opponents. Lots of people didn't like his promos but lots of people also LOVED his promos. It felt like they were going to push him to the next level. Welp, that never happened.

 

You say you agree Rusev needs to be made into a STAH but I'd be interested to hear how you would go about that in modern WWE. Beating midcard jabronies for a long ass time only does so much. Personally I'm trying to figure out that keystone win that puts him in the upper echelon, that he clearly can be in, that doesn't involve Cena or Lesnar.

 

EDIT: I think delivering this creative direction on Twitter would be great for the #brand. Even if you just tweet out the post. Thank you.

[JerryvonKramer]

It is a conundrum of the modern product for sure. Something like ...

 

Rusev over Orton - generic PPV

Rusev over Jericho (if he's active) - generic PPV

Rusev over Christian (if he's active) - generic PPV

Rusev over HHH - Summerslam

Rusev over HHH again (gimmick match) - Survivor Series

Rusev over Reigns - Royal Rumble

Rusev vs. Brock - Wrestlemania

 

That's a push and a half. Although looking at the roster it seems pretty thin on established star power.

 

I think another thing they could do is have some more squashes on Raws. JTTS or jobbers. A guy like Rusev could get some mileage out of kicking the shit out of the Mulkeys.

[JerryvonKramer]

Also, one of the realities of booking is that you can't push that many people at once. If Rusev is getting a big push, you can't ALSO push Bryan, Reigns, and Rollins. Something has to give. So let's say Reigns is the other guy getting pushed, you feed Bryan to Rusev and Rollins to Reigns.

 

You CANNOT make four new singles stars at the same time just through booking.

[goodhelmet]

Austin, Rock, Taker, Kane, HHH, Foley, Angle

 

It can be done

[goodhelmet]

Also, Meltzer said on his radio show that live, Sting vs. HHH felt like a great match but that it is neck and neck with the Divas match for worst match votes in his feedback. Might be another case of a match that is over huge live but dies on Tv. He is blaming the commentary.

[(BP)]

JBL screaming things like, "Damn you Razor!" was hysterical.