Wrestling: The Action Soap Opera Thread - - Part 15

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

So you're telling me Austin was over because he got "put over"? I disagree. Austin would have gotten himself over either way. I believe it is up to the star to get himself over and make the best of what he was given.

Drew McIntyre has the look, and was given the push, but has no credibility because he did nothing with it to make himself stand out as a star. During the run up to his first title, and the accompanying reign, sheamus had the look and the push but no cred cuz he did nothing with it. Jack swagger was "put over" but now he's managing Michael freaking Cole cuz he did nothing with his opportunity.

Guys like Kurt angle or Chris Jericho put in tye work in the lower cards and made themselves stand out to the point that they had to be pushed into the main event. I dont care if Jericho had a bad title reign. He's credible as **** cuz he made himself and got himself over. Same with miz. Same reason why now sheamus is credible when he wasnt before.

I dont agree that hbk putting over Austin is what made him. Austin would have been a star regardless. He just would have taken a different path to get there.

 

[Kaleb]

Just got done with watching Kidd vs Barreta,what an excellent match.

 

[Gotham Knight]

This really stuck out to me in your argument, and I disagree. Stone Cold Steve Austin was an amazing talent, but if Shawn Michaels hadn't put him over at Wrestlemania, and if he wasn't booked strong during his first title run, I doubt he would've became biggest draw in history. Part of buying into Austin's character was that he was able to overcome guys like HBK, Undertaker, Foley, and Kane.

The Rock didn't beat Austin until Wrestlemania 19, but along that road, he defeated Foley, Triple H, Undertaker, Hogan, Kane, Big Show, Angle, Benoit, Jericho. Not to mention winning the Royal Rumble.

It takes the star's ability and the right booking to get him to the top and make him a huge star. A guy can't run with an opportunity if the opportunity is weak or poorly done.

The guy can have all of the ability in the world but if the booking isn't right, if someone doesn't put him over, or he doesn't get put over properly, it won't stick and the guy comes out weak.

Chris Jericho's Undisputed title reign is proof of this, and he mentions it so in his book how bad he was booked.

While I agree 100% that a product of bad booking can end a guy, most of the time, it's usually not the case IMO.

But I would argue that Austin's wins came AFTER he had proven himself. After he proved that he could grab a crowd by the throat, not just with his gimmick, but with his ability to enthrall them with his charming(in an abrasive kind of way)mic skills.

He was/is one of the best to ever cut a promo. Same with The Rock. Ted Dibiase Jr. can tell me a story and pull me into the action in the ring, when he's wrestling a match. He can't tell me a story on the microphone, nor can he make me care about his wants/ambitions.

I think Cody Rhodes is a great example. He's got the full package, and that's why he's not getting disrespected. If we don't see him in the main event picture, it's likely due to his size. Now that could be attributed to bad booking. However Swagger and Dibiase don't fit that profile. But ultimately, I think that the main reason is what I said before. Austin/The Rock's pushes came after they had proven they could draw in the crowd.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Jeff hardy is the exception, not the rule, who got over with the crowd cuz he jumped off ladders through tables at ppv's.

Its the same reason why rey mysterio is over, and the same reason why sin cara is and will continue to be over because what they do in the ring is an amazing, larger than life, spectacle. Emphasis on "larger than life"

I feel like the iwc is quick to ignore that. Austin was over because his character was larger than life. Rocks mic skills and charisma were larger than life. Cena is larger than life. The spectacle that was a Shawn Michaels wrestlemania match was larger than life. Hogan slamming Andre the giant was larger than life. Jericho's abbrasive personality is so exaggerated that it becomes larger than life. Mick foleys bumps were larger than life. Triple h was larger than life. Undertaker is the epitome of larger than life. Kurt angle might not be larger tyan life, bit his Olympic hero persona was greatly exaggerated to make him larger than life. The spectacle of rey mysterio or sin cara flipping around off of any halfway solid surface is larger than life. Jeff hardy Swanton bombing off of 20 ft ladders through announce tables is larger than life. And the miz, well tye miz is a greatly exaggerated "bro" *****ebag that becomes larger than life. CM Punk is not larger than life. He's great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Daniel Bryan is great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Jack swagger is not larger than life. John Morrison could be a spectacle if he'd get his personal act together and could cut half a promo. That's why the miz is a top guy and cm punk is jobbing to Orton. That's why Daniel Bryan is floating around in obscurity. That's why Drew McIntyre has disappeared. That's why dolph zigger hasn't gotten a steady main event push. These guys might be great at what they do but what they do isn't a larger than life spectacle. And that's what WWE is and pretty much always has been.

 

[BlackLantern]

and now Jeff Hardy is a waste of space

 

[Gotham Knight]

The Miz was the afterthought in that feud. I was even rolling and liking Miz as champion until Rock returned. When that happened, Miz felt less relevant, and when he interrupted the first Rock/Cena face-to-face confrontation, it was almost as if I forgot that he was champion. He looked like a boy holding a toy belt wanting attention. It was like a little mortal interrupting a meeting between two titans. One of my friends who hadn't watched it in awhile, saw the confrontation said the Miz doesn't belong out there.

He's a solid talker and he's improved greatly in the ring but he lacks a quality that says "He can be champion". He has nothing that really causes him to stand out too much. It's not his size because guys his size and smaller have that "It" factor. Miz is really missing that moment he needs to get him there, and having stuff like nearly losing his title in a ladder match in his first defense to the retired Jerry Lawler but winning because Michael Cole interfering isn't helping.

But that goes back to the booking. If Cena was booked to fight Lawler closely, then he would lose credibility. The WWE made their Champion look weak. That was their own stupidity. It's a politics game, and the Miz isn't in a position where it would be wise for him to throw a fit like an HBK might have.

Jeff Hardy's WWE success contradicts this theory though, as he was always a weak talker but had an abundance of charisma and that got him to the top. Swagger really doesn't have a lot of charisma and isn't a good talker, that's really why he isn't going anywhere.

This is a really good point. However I think that Jeff was an exception. Much like Matt could have been. Everybody roots for the underdog. And for years we watched Jeff earn his stripes in the tag team division.

The one thing that stands out to me that seperates Jeff from Swagger, is multiple years that he put his body on the line. All of the bumps and bruises he had taken. So many fans including myself, grew up watching this guy take risk that no one ever thought possible. After all of those years seeing that, people wanted to see the underdog get to the top of the mountain.

Another reason that I'll argue, is that Swagger wasn't on Jeff's level of Charisma. If I were to dress up in Swagger's gear and go out to the ring jumping around, beating on my chest. I would get the same reaction as him. Swagger is a guy in dressed in wrestling gear, and nothing more than that. What makes me think that he's nothing more than your average 20 something year old?

With Jeff, his Charisma was made off of taking crazy bumps. This isn't the case with Swagger. People gradually gained respect for Jeff, whether they heard him talk or not. Because with his body, he was telling them that he cared about putting on a show for them. Even if it meant a possibly fatal injury. Swagger doesn't set himself apart the way that Jeff did with his crazy bumps, or his different hair colors, or his wacky attire. At least he had that.

Swagger is just again, a 20 something year old that comes out and wrestles. He doesn't pull the fans into the show.
Jeff hardy is the exception, not the rule, who got over with the crowd cuz he jumped off ladders through tables at ppv's.

Jeff hardy is the exception, not the rule, who got over with the crowd cuz he jumped off ladders through tables at ppv's.

Its the same reason why rey mysterio is over, and the same reason why sin cara is and will continue to be over because what they do in the ring is an amazing, larger than life, spectacle. Emphasis on "larger than life"

I feel like the iwc is quick to ignore that. Austin was over because his character was larger than life. Rocks mic skills and charisma were larger than life. Cena is larger than life. The spectacle that was a Shawn Michaels wrestlemania match was larger than life. Hogan slamming Andre the giant was larger than life. Jericho's abbrasive personality is so exaggerated that it becomes larger than life. Mick foleys bumps were larger than life. Triple h was larger than life. Undertaker is the epitome of larger than life. Kurt angle might not be larger tyan life, bit his Olympic hero persona was greatly exaggerated to make him larger than life. The spectacle of rey mysterio or sin cara flipping around off of any halfway solid surface is larger than life. Jeff hardy Swanton bombing off of 20 ft ladders through announce tables is larger than life. And the miz, well tye miz is a greatly exaggerated "bro" *****ebag that becomes larger than life. CM Punk is not larger than life. He's great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Daniel Bryan is great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Jack swagger is not larger than life. John Morrison could be a spectacle if he'd get his personal act together and could cut half a promo. That's why the miz is a top guy and cm punk is jobbing to Orton. That's why Daniel Bryan is floating around in obscurity. That's why Drew McIntyre has disappeared. That's why dolph zigger hasn't gotten a steady main event push. These guys might be great at what they do but what they do isn't a larger than life spectacle. And that's what WWE is and pretty much always has been.

It's funny, because I didn't see your post before I made mine. And we pretty much said the exact same thing and in agreement.

 

[Wheels]

Nell and Gotham Knight, may I ask when you started watching wrestling?

 

[Nemi]

My worry about the streak ending is commitment....on both sides. It's possible the person they choose might leave but it's also possible that WWE themselves might decide to end that persons push for no reason. Either way it becomes a waste. Which is not to say that it shouldn't be ended, but it has to be someone that EVERYONE is commited to.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Lol yea Gotham you and I are definitely on tye same page. And it goes back to my view that I want character over wrestling ability. Yea Daniel Bryan is great or whatever, but its boring. If I wanted to watch good technical wrestling, id watch Olympic or amateur wrestling. But I dont want to watch that, I find it boring. I dont even like ufc for damn sake lol.

I want the larger than life spectacle. I want Jeff hardy Swanton bombing off of ladders. I want triple h pedigreeing dudes through announce tables. I want the rock laying a verbal smackdown on his opponents. I want Austin stone cold stunning anything that moves. I want Shawn Michaels elbow dropping through tables. I want undertaker chokeslamming fools to hell. I want the miz making an entrance through the word "Awesome" acting like he's gods gift to wrestling . I want edge doing whatever he decides to do off a ladder today.or kharma awesome bombing girls into oblivion.

Sorry but Daniel Bryan doesn't offer a thrill. Technical mat based wrestling is boring. I'll watch the olympics for that. Say what you want about it, im conditioned or whatever, but from wrestling I want sports entertainment. Its about the pagentry and the spectacle. Being larger than life. There's a reason why there are guys who's entrances take up 3 minutes.

 

[Metallo]

Flaws at events like No Mercy or Backlash prove that he can be beaten at WrestleMania?

Flaws at Wrestlemania itself. If the undead can get chloroformed then MAYBE he isn't unbeatable. If Triple H can beat him so badly that he's a brain damaged vegetable then maybe he isn't indestructible.

They key to any competition in wrestling is an element of uncertainty. Its always important to have that and even WWE knows it otherwise they wouldn't try to play it up.

I've been a wrestling fan all of my life. I apologize for just waking up and responding to your answers not completely alert.

Didn't realize that we were splitting hairs here.

You were the one that felt to need to point it out not me.

I thought I made it clear that I don't want the streak to end for the very reason that I don't think there is anyone young enough that is worthy of doing so.

You can say a lot of guys were unworthy early on in their careers but like I said you also have to take risks at some point. Its been risks that have pulled WWE out of the fire at times. There are guys with a spark of potential on the roster and a handful that are talented that could do something with the streak if WWE gets behind them.

NOBODY is worthy if WWE doesn't back them. THATS the problem not just the talent.

And there certainly isn't any established wrestler like The Rock or HBK that need the accolade at this point.

But there are some talents with potential.

And you fail to point out that the entire Hart Foundation interfered and helped Bret get him into the Sharpshooter.

And you failed to point out Jericho HELPED Miz and he STILL couldn't win. At plenty of point sit was JUST Miz and Bret in the ring and Miz STILL couldn't get the job done against a retiree who he lost his title to.

Punk also loss to Randy Orton at WrestleMania. Know who beat Randy Orton at WrestleMania? The Undertaker.

And Punk has also BEAT Taker and retained a title against him. Like I said even at Wrestlemania Taker HAS weaknesses. If Punk beats Orton next week whats your excuse then?

Miz has lost to people that have lost to taker. Therefore Miz has no chance in hell of ever beating Taker...by your own logic. Miz has never had an in ring performance that went above his best at the AVERAGE WWE PPV so you can't say he raises his game at Mania. He didn't.

Splitting hairs again especially considering the fact that Punk doesn't know how to beat the Undertaker at WrestleMania.

Its called a pinfall. Thats how he beats him. He beats him at mania the same way ANYBODY beats someone anywhere else. He just tries harder and works smarter and Punk is a wrestler that grasps the psychological factor so that gives him a better shot than Miz immediately.

If that were the case, then Triple H could have used his experience with the Undertaker to beat him n his two WrestleMania attempts.

Undertaker also gained more experience with how Triple H works at Mania so that HE could use that experience to defeat The Game. Triple H lost because he got careless near the end.

Like him or not, he gets a reaction. Vince doesn't care how good he is on the mic or how good in the ring, as long as he sells merchandise and keeps the crowd entertained, Vince and the WWE are happy.

Do you have a chart with how much merchandise he is selling? I thought not. LOTS of guys get reactions. Miz is getting what he's getting because of the exposure his reality tv background gave him. Not because of any reaction. He got those tv talk show spots because he was a Real World star who made big in WWE. THATS why Vince pushes him. But at the end of the day thats not going to draw money in the WWE.

Several of Miz's segments have LOST tv viewers over the last 6 months. Yeah he's REALLY drawing people in consistently at the top

Besides, you clearly dislike the guy and yet you still watch, so that means that he's doing his job. Part of being a heel is making the fans dislike you. You can certainly refute this and I know that you likely will rather easily, but I'll leave it up to you.

Thats quite a personal assumption. The same can be said of you clearly disliking Punk.

I don't WATCH for Miz. Don't you get that? Like Blacklantern said the BRAND is drawing. Are you sitting outside my window watching exactly what I watch when Raw is on?

If Miz was doing his job as a heel I would watch to see him get beat. THAT is a heel doing his job. When Miz is on I tend to change the channel. That is NOT a heel doing his job.

Or they can release a DVD featuring his last four WrestleMania matches. Another a couple years later with all of the matches. Another with some commentary from talent backstage. Make another one and put some special features on it including a rare match from early in his career.

They've already released several dvd's with his Wrestlemania matches so that kills some of the demand for a streak dvd right there. How many people are going to buy a new DVD where they ALREADY have most fo the content on an old dvd release?

Wrestlemania is WWE's biggest DVD seller so for mos tof those fans who own most of the Wrestlemania dvd's theres not even much of a point in buying the streak dvd except for the extras. And how many people are going to pay 20 bucks JUST for extras? Some will but not all.

The True Story of Wrestlemania dvd ran into the same problems. People not sure if they wanted to buy a set where they already had a lot of the content.

There have already been Undertaker career retrospectives as well so that has already been WELL mined.

If this is JUST for Taker fans who only buy Taker stuff they aklready have most of this.

People will keep shelling out their money for the same thing, as long as the WWE renames it and gives a little something extra with it.

Not in this economy with employment still high. Besides when you've got that choice to make between a Taker dvd of the SAME OLD STUFF and a new DVD with new stuff its not a hard choice for a lot of people to make. WWE has more competition than ever from the entertainment industry and the home video market.

If people were willing to buy the same stuff with a new name why have the Best of Raw early season sets not sold as well as WWE hoped?

And if they miss and pick a guy that turns out to be a bust, then they just crapped on one of their greatest talents of all time.

No they haven't. Taker is ALWAYS going to be Taker. You underestimate him if you think his popularity is ONLY because of the streak.

Thats why WWE needs to pick a guy and groom him properly and make sure its a guy with talent. They'll know he's not a bust if he does well BEFORE he ever meets Taker.

WWE is going to have a hard time selling 19-1 t-shirts and DVD's. "Hey WWE fans, buy our DVD of this wrestler that accomplished one of the greatest streaks of all time, only to lose it late in his career pretty much nullifying any supernatural or amazing prowess that was once believed to be had throughout an amazing streak. Turns out that he was just a great wrestler and lucky as it easily could have ended before. It was nothing more than that."

Good luck selling that.

They've already sold a TON of 16-0, 17-0 etc T shirts and DVD?s Its not like the merchandising of the streak is new.

Besides if they don't sell a 20-0 T shirt they can still sell a History of the Undertaker or Career retrospective shirt and dvd. The guy is still going to make them money with merchandise even if he loses which some people don't seem to understand.

And I don't need luck to sell that . A new top star is going to sell a lot more merchandise over a 10-20 year career than ONE run of Streak T shirts and dvd's are going to sell in 1 or 2 years.

Do you think a Taker 20-0 T shirt is goign to outsell all the merch Cena has sold in his entire career? I don't think so.

I never said that he did.

You said he should retire undefeated and that the streak makes more money. Thats you saying he did.

Wait, you can see into the future? Where did you get this inside information? Or did you just make it up based off of your opinion of how the company that you don't control should be run? I'm guessing that it's the latter.

I could ask you the same thing. Apparently you have a crystal ball and a psychic on speed dial.

Hated what schedule? That's the WWE life. The Miz is working just as hard of a schedule as John Cena in terms of taking bumps. They all work house shows and have to make appearances and autograph signings. No one in the WWE works harder than the other.

Thats why he left. Don't complain to me complain to him. Some people do work harder than others and some people do get preferential treatment so I'm not sure what you're talking about there.

When necessary the top stars don't do the house show circuit as hard. Miz CERTAINLY isn't putting the grind on his body that an Angle, Michaels, or Benoit did because he's simply not that kind of wrestler.

He's not even putting the wear and tear on his body that Cena does because Cena wrestles a much more physical power based style.

Lesnar walked all over some of the greats and then when he decided that the wrestling business was too tough for him, he was going to bail out. You're really going to blame WWE for how they handled him? Poor Lesnar, he got pushed better than any WWE wrestler ever had, promoted, and made the face of the WWE.

Lesnar didn't prepare himself for the WWE but WWE didn't prepare him either. it was THEIR choice to push Lesnar to the moon so fast. Do you think Lesnar made that choice by himself? It was WWE's poor insight and poor planning that was also a factor on Lesnar souring. WWE's rarely ever pushed top stars like that before Lesnar they simply lost their patience. And sometimes they do the same thing now because they've forgotten how to properly groom stars.

Darn that WWE for making that guy a superstar and putting ridiculous amounts of money in his pockets.

Darn them for not grooming Lesnar properly and making him earn respect for the business before giving him everything easily.

Austin and The Rock aren't really products of who they were put over. Austin was made into a star for his gimmick of a reckless, beat up whoever he wants guy. That feud with Vince really propelled him too. Everyone loves seeing the boss and management get beat up. Not what made him, but it was a big reason.

If Austin has stayed the Ringmaster or jobbed he'd never be the star he is. Austin had the talent but WWE also gave him the opportunity. ANYBODY can see that.

Bret Hart was ABSOLUTELY important to making Austin a bigger star. So was Jake Roberts. Austins 3:16 wouldn't have WORKED on anybody but Jake because of what Jake was goign through at the time and Bret was one of the top guys in the company when he worked with Austin. Austin did NOT make himself.

Same is true for the Rock. WWE and his peers GAVE him an opportunity and helped make him. He didn't do it himself.

As for The Rock, he isn't what he is today because of a win over Triple H. Heck, you do realize that he lost multiple times to Austin at WrestleMania before he finally beat him years later, right? The same year that he left until his return recently.

The Rock had wins over other guys and was given opportunities over other guys. WE LET him lead the Nation. WWE LET him become the Rock. Working with HHH and Austin it the midcard before he ever GOT to the main event helped The Rock show what he was capable of.

He made himself off of his mic skills and charisma. A lot of people think that you need to get put over in order to become a superstar. When in reality, charisma and and talent are all that you really need. Not to mention that The Rock was a great in-ring talent.

So you think The Rock created his WHOLE character by himself and did EVERYTHING he ever did by himself? What if certain people had refused to work with him at all? NO wrestler is solely responsible for their own popularity.

Neither guy deserves to end the streak. I'm merely picking between the two guys. And not to sound like a broken record, but I'll take the guy with less mileage and more upside IMO.

A limp wristed weakling is a guy with upside? The only upside Miz has is a reality tv background. And thats not goign to help him sell tickets. He and WWE have to do that and when Miz can't even DRAW consistently in the ratings what kind of upside does he have?

You talk about realism and reasoning of WHY Punk can't beat Taker so Mi's "upside" is pointless. That same reasoning applies to him even more than it does Punk. Miz has been booked as a lying cheating little worm. Not a wrestler. Punk is at least shown to be capable between the ropes. Miz is a clown that entertains with silly jokes.

The TRUE stars in WWE ALL had more going for them than that.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

Antman: summer 1999 when smackdown debuted.

first wwf show I ever saw:
Main event of rock n sock connection v. Undertaker and big show in a buried alive match for the tag titles. Triple h interfered to attack rock, and stone cold busted out of the back of the ambulance to whip triple h's ass. I was hooked ever since.

I can assure you if the show was full of cm punk v. Daniel Bryan "mat classics" I wouldn't be a wrestling fan today, 12 years later.

 

[Metallo]

How did that turn out for them with Lesnar? How would you decide if a guy was committed enough?

This is a good discussion and I don't mean this in a negative way. But could you give me an answer at least for this question? I truly am curious as to how you think they can tell when to lay all their eggs in a basket with one guy.

The same way this business has ALWAYS made long term stars. Don't GIVE them the moon. make them WORK for it over a long period of time. Don't give them everything but give them fair opportunities to grow.

The same way Hogan, Austin, Sting, Hart, Taker, Savage, Michaels, Cena, Edge, Flair, Bruno, and every other star for the last 50 years has EARNED their place in the business. This isn't a hard thing to figure out. Do you think Hogan was just HANDED a top spot on the WWWF in 1977? No he toiled for years in other places and it was 7 years before Vince Jr chose him as THE guy for his new WWF.

They took guys who either loved the Pro wrestling business or GAINED respect for it after workign hard to achieve something for years and helped groom them to become stars. Thats something Lesnar NEVER had to do. He never LOVED the pro business or the WWE in any deep way.

All the other guys who made it long term WORKED HARD for what they got thus they appreciated it. Thats true for anything in life. If you bust your ass and fight tooth and nail for something you're damn sure going to appreciate it more.

Again, how do they make sure?

See above.

They didn't just give a regular push to Lesnar. They gave him a mega push like nothing ever seen before inside the WWE. It's not just my opinion. Ask Vince if they'll ever do that again. The answer will be "No." and it's because they can't risk feeding their most talented wrestlers to a guy and then having him walk up and leave.

That was Vince's fault. HE made the call to give Brock a mega push before he had any real experience in the big leagues.

Where does that leave them? They don't need to give a mega push like you seem to think. You don't need a guy to cleanly beat The Rock, Austin, Triple H and Undertaker to help make him a star. Their top stars now like Cena and Randy Orton will do just fine in terms of giving credible wins.

Er...no. Cena and Orton are their top stars but even they are polarizing and don't shine as brightly as stars of the past. Cena may be the top guy but he is no Hogan nor Flair or Austin. The WWE is comfortable right now but they are drawing on a smaller audience which means smaller money coming in overall compared to the past.

Triple H and especially the Undertaker are cornerstones of the company that appeal to SEVERAL eras of WWE fans. Cena really doesn't.

Taker is the one man who has spanned the Hogan/Rock'n'Wrestling Era, the New Generation, The Attitude Era, and the eras after. Cena doesn't have that credibility with the fanbase as a whole and isn't a part of the very FABRIC of the WWE they way Taker is. We STILL aren't sure if Orton is even the draw that Cena is.

The rub Taker and HHH can give is on an entire different level than the one Cena gives. When you lose to Taker its a changing of the guard a passing of the torch..a much bigger deal.

I'm not sure how the WWE handles blood anymore. But what I do know is if they didn't turn it to black and white, it's because the amount of blood wasn't bad enough. It has nothing to do with storylines. If it did, they would still allow blood for matches like the one Christian and Alberto Del Rio had at Extreme Rules.

They could have done a better job with the camera angles to hide it but they didn't bother. And WWE has stopped matches for less blood than Taker had shown that night. They were simply willing to let it slide and it showed in character that he is vulnerable.

As for the Undertaker, he might not be the undead guy anymore. But he still has supernatural powers. At least that's how I view him. He may be a man, but there's still some unexplainable powers that he has. And I think that it stays within his character to show that even with those powers, he's still capable of becoming worn out if enough damage is taken.

But he IS still more of a man than he ever was in the 90's. A man that can be hurt. We SAW that at Wrestlemania this year. His lightning can't pin the other guy in the ring.

The way that you assume that the Miz couldn't beat the Undertaker because he never has. Pot meet kettle?

No its not. Punk has shown FAR more in ring skill than Miz ever has. THATS how I assume he can win a WRESTLING match more easily at any point. Whats so special about Miz in the ring? Nothing. Punk on the other hand HAS shown an in ring aptitude when it comes to mat wrestling, striking, submissions, etc. Miz has ONE sh** finishing move that he can't even do all that well sometimes.

I'm not saying that he isn't fallible. I'm simply stating that his gimmick would tell you that there's more to the fact that he's the ONLY WWE Wrestler undefeated at WrestleMania.(At least with a significant streak)

Thats because he's TALENTED. But every dog has his day. And one day somebody could have his number. Thats not outside of the realm of possibility.

Or because his opponents were Albert and Big Show.

He was the human American Badass when he beat HHH and Flair...not exactly Albert and Big Show. And that was when HHH was at his absolute peak.

I'm only talking about how he's obtained the Championship. Even so, beating Jeff Hardy cleanly isn't an amazing feat. Super Cena on the other hand....

Beating Hardy clean was still better than Miz was able to accomplish. And it was one of the more popular feuds in WWE at the time. Miz has stood out in none of his feuds since he won the title. he took a backseat to the Rock and Cena leading up to Mania.

Orton was worn out, but not recovering from getting knocked out from a Batista Bomb. Same goes for CM Punk beating Jeff Hardy. I guess you could call it a draw as one was attacked by Nexus and on his feet, the other suffered through a brutal ladder match and managed to get to his feet.

Getting beat up by FIVE guys is just as bad or WORSE than one Batista bomb. And Miz STILL had a HARDER time beating Orton than Punk did beating Edge. Its not a draw. Miz has OFTEN been shown to look weaker than Most. He had trouble when feuding with Jerry Lawler, a 62 year old part time wrestler.

Cena fans and a lot of the fanbase of the WWE now are children, and they react to the Miz. Meaning that he's a good villain and a good draw. It has nothing to do with my opinion, it's the truth. It doesn't matter if your opinion is that he isn't entertaining. As long as he helps sell a storyline by playing a villain, then he's doing his job.

If he's a good draw then why are segments down and why did the need The Rock to break and Austin and Trish Stratus and HBK in the HOF to break One million PPV buys. A GOOD draw doesn't need that. The main event was WEAK and WWE knew it and they knew they needed help to draw.

Miz's ratings have often been DOWN. How is that a good draw. Vickie Guerrero gets more heat than the Miz and she's not even a wrestler. He's not the draw you say he is. CENA is a draw. ORTON is a draw. Miz is no REAL draw yet. When Edge first wont he WWE title THAT was a draw. Miz didn't drawn ratings like that with his first WWE title win.

Uh I would agree with you but.... Pro wrestling isn't completely real.... Some aspects are fake. They have writers. And if these writers want to overshadow you by building up a WrestleMania match that will happen a year later, then there isn't anything that you can do about it.

If it were real, then I could understand. He should have grabbed the attention and the spotlight. But in reality, there isn't a thing the man can do if management doesn't know how to do their jobs correctly.

Doesn't matter if it was real. The WWE can't FORCE the audience to play along with their storylines. The people WANTED to see Cena and Rock and tuned in to see them. When neither one was involved and it was just The Miz people didn't care. Saying its not real doesn't matter. The PEOPLE decided The Miz was an afterthought more than the WWE did.

WWE TRIED to make Miz relivant and many of the fans didn't buy it.

If he has no talent then why are they having him feud with their top dog in John Cena?

Billy Kidman feuded with Hulk Hogan. Whats your point? This isn't Miz's first feud with Cena..and in that one he CLEARLY wasn't a top guy in the making yet.

Why would Miz feud with Cena? To be fodder...or to be a placeholder because they are extremely low on veteran talent. What choice do they have?

Like I said Miz kept the top spot long enough to feud with Cena more than anything because of the mainstream media attention his title win got because of his reality tv background. And Vince LOVES mainstream media attention.

Getting Disqualified looks tougher than actually getting counted out due to fighting because getting Disqualified means that you likely took a cheap shot at someone? I don't get the logic.

A countout means you are OUT of the ring where a pinfall usually can't even happen. Whats not to get about that? With a DQ theres still a chance you can lose because sometimes its in the ring. A countout is never in the ring unless its a knockout.

And on countout the champ usually retains. You retain with no chance of getting pinned. Thats far more of a chickensh** tactic.

And the WWE management don't believe anyone is good enough to cleanly beat Cena at WrestleMania at this point. Not just the Miz.

Orton beat him cleanly in a triple threat with HHH involved at Mania for the title. Thats better than the Miz has ever done

Yet we've never seen Cena beat the Miz cleanly(Or dirty for that matter)at WrestleMania. Same with Shawn Michaels. Who's to say that the Miz couldn't beat HBK at Mania anyway? Match has never happened.

Cena has beaten guys FAR better than the Miz. Far more accolades far more Wrestlemania experience. If HBK could beat Bret Hart Chris Jericho and Ric Flair at Mania I'm pretty sure he could beat the Miz.

Miz didn't put on an EXCEPTIONAL wrestling performance at Mania so to say just because nobody beat him there in the main event is pointless because his performance level wasn't any higher than events where he HAS been beaten.

I never said that Punk was weak. All I'm saying is that the Miz in my opinion has more potential with a win over Taker at Mania. And Cena didn't Superman a win at WrestleMania, he ended up hurting himself and helping the Miz retain the title.

I said Cena WOULD have if the Rock hadn't Rock bottomed him. Cena was protected from the loss story wise. he retained by such a lame countout win that Rock restarted the match so he could cost Cena the title then GIVE it to Miz on a silver platter. Then he kicked his a** too. Miz ended Mania looking like a fool.

Miz still looked like a chump who got handed the win. Such a chump that Cena and Rock were more concerned about each other the next night on Raw. Yeah thats REALLY making your mark as champ with the top guys basically ignore wanting another piece of you.

Although I will help you out with your own argument, because for what it's worth, CM Punk has cleanly pinned the Miz twice. I'm surprised you didn't bring that up. But regardless it was early on in both of their WWE careers and it still has nothing to do with their potential after ending the streak.

And Miz still isn't the performer Punk is. If Punk can beat Miz then there's no way Miz could beat any NUMBER of gusy clean much less Taker.

Punk is better at playing the villain. He cuts a better promo. He's better in the ring. Miz is good at playing the weakling *****bag...not the villain needed when it comes to the grand stage.

Almost. But not as bad as beating Edge who had know idea where he was, whereas with Orton his leg was injured and he was weakened.

He had little trouble beating Edge once he cashed in. Orton had the hell beat out of him by a GANG. It took SIX guys to beat Orton that night.

I disagree. He wisely picked him apart before finishing him off.

How is it picking him apart when the man is already HURT and yet he STILL puts up a much tougher fight than he should? The Anderson's picked guys apart. Miz TRIED to take advantage and STILL had trouble beating a wounded Orton.

Again, CM Punk needed more help with Batista. Second time with Jeff Hardy was equal.

Thats better than Miz's entire ONE reign where he needed help. Its not equal.

What does that say about the rest of the WWE/CM Punk that the World Champion's biggest threat was 62 year old Lawler?

It doesn't say anything about the rest of the roster because THEY weren't the ones wrestling Lawler in a long term feud. Lawler won the battle royal to get his title shot at EC with a lot of luck. He didn't beat the rest of the roster one on one. But Miz DID have trouble beating Lawler one on one...a guy at LEAST 20 years past his prime and a few years short of a senior citizen card.

Again, you don't remember this match too well as you forget that, there were two guys one of which weighs about 300 pounds that decided to involve themselves in the match to basically hand the win to Bret.

You don't remember it too well either because Miz had JERICHO helping him and he still couldn't beat Bret.

What about the times when Bret and Miz were ALONE together in the ring one on one? The Miz STILL couldn't beat Bret. Whats his excuse then? Other people weren't in the ring with Miz and Bret the entire time.

Neither is or should. Between the two, I'll take the guy that managed to hold on to the World Championship for about 5 months on the brand with Cena. CM Punk isn't devastating in the ring, he's good playing mind games. I could see the Miz finding a way to pick up a clean win more than CM Punk.

Miz didn't feud with Cena for most of those 5 months so he was never in danger of Cena taking the title if he wasn't working with him. That only happened when their program happened.

Punk is more devastating than Miz. He's got more clean wins over Cena than Miz does.

How is Miz goign to pick up a CLEAN win when he's not as good a wrestler or as good at playing mind games compared to CM Punk.

That would be considered a dirty win.

Well thats the only way he could believable beat Taker. They didn't even give Miz a CLEAN pinfall win over Cena.

Miz slowly picked apart Randy Orton en route to his first title run. I could see him picking apart a beaten down Taker on his last leg slowly before finishing him off. At least, I can see it better than CM Punk.

he didn't pick him apart he had trouble beating him. THATS why it took so long.

 

[Heretic]

There really aren't many people that are worthy right now bu that could change. I can't believe you listed boring as hell Bobby Lashley though. Somebody like Brock would be the ideal candidate.

I listed Bobby Lashley because WWE saw him as the future of their company. They gave him the world...and he walked away. If ANYONE was in line to end the streak, it was Lashley...and it would have been a MAJOR mistake for WWE to make.

Brock Lesnar was given the world. He was THE FUTURE of WWE. He was certainly a top choice to end The Streak...and if they had let him...he still would have left the company and they would have made a horrible decision and lost millions of dollars in potential revenue.

Just because some of us think a guy should get the rub from ending The Streak, that won't keep them from leaving WWE a few months later...

 

[BlackLantern]

I listed Bobby Lashley because WWE saw him as the future of their company. They gave him the world...and he walked away. If ANYONE was in line to end the streak, it was Lashley...and it would have been a MAJOR mistake for WWE to make.

Brock Lesnar was given the world. He was THE FUTURE of WWE. He was certainly a top choice to end The Streak...and if they had let him...he still would have left the company and they would have made a horrible decision and lost millions of dollars in potential revenue.

Just because some of us think a guy should get the rub from ending The Streak, that won't keep them from leaving WWE a few months later...

EXACTLY....this was the point of my earlier post....the WWE is pushing the brand of the WWE over any talent because, as history has shown...with Lashley, The Rock, Lesnar, Batista....they don't stick around

performers today are different, they have plans for life after wrestling....in previous generations guys ended up in professional wrestling because they didn't fit anywhere else...that is not the case anymore....these guys have college degrees and are planning ahead

 

[Heretic]

People are saying that CM Punk should have ended The Streak this year...and now we're all wondering if he's even going to resign. So...let's say that Punk DID beat Taker at Mania...and a few months later decides to take a year or two off...what good did it do the company??? None.

Remember when Kennedy was a future top star? Maybe they should have let him end The Streak...so that TNA could profit off of his victory??

WWE KNOWS that they can make money off of a perfect Streak...they do not know what will happen if they end it. Therefore, they won't end it.

 

[TX85]

is TNA's ppv tonight??,I haven't kept up much with it all month!

 

[The Sage]

So you're telling me Austin was over because he got "put over"? I disagree. Austin would have gotten himself over either way. I believe it is up to the star to get himself over and make the best of what he was given.

Drew McIntyre has the look, and was given the push, but has no credibility because he did nothing with it to make himself stand out as a star. During the run up to his first title, and the accompanying reign, sheamus had the look and the push but no cred cuz he did nothing with it. Jack swagger was "put over" but now he's managing Michael freaking Cole cuz he did nothing with his opportunity.

Guys like Kurt angle or Chris Jericho put in tye work in the lower cards and made themselves stand out to the point that they had to be pushed into the main event. I dont care if Jericho had a bad title reign. He's credible as **** cuz he made himself and got himself over. Same with miz. Same reason why now sheamus is credible when he wasnt before.

I dont agree that hbk putting over Austin is what made him. Austin would have been a star regardless. He just would have taken a different path to get there.

No, what I'm saying is both come into play. Austin got himself over but what made him the superstar he is today is that the established talent in his time lost to him, giving him credibility.

You need both. Your examples with McIntyre and Swagger nail this perfectly.

And if HBK hadn't put Austin over, then someone else would have. My point is, the person's talent has to work along with proper booking and established guys losing to them.

You bring up Sheamus and I want to comment...Sheamus got over despite how he was booked. He looked like a fluke champion in both of his title reigns, but he kept nurturing his ability and got better and better.

While I agree 100% that a product of bad booking can end a guy, most of the time, it's usually not the case IMO.

But I would argue that Austin's wins came AFTER he had proven himself. After he proved that he could grab a crowd by the throat, not just with his gimmick, but with his ability to enthrall them with his charming(in an abrasive kind of way)mic skills.

He was/is one of the best to ever cut a promo. Same with The Rock. Ted Dibiase Jr. can tell me a story and pull me into the action in the ring, when he's wrestling a match. He can't tell me a story on the microphone, nor can he make me care about his wants/ambitions.

I think Cody Rhodes is a great example. He's got the full package, and that's why he's not getting disrespected. If we don't see him in the main event picture, it's likely due to his size. Now that could be attributed to bad booking. However Swagger and Dibiase don't fit that profile. But ultimately, I think that the main reason is what I said before. Austin/The Rock's pushes came after they had proven they could draw in the crowd.

No disagreement here whatsoever. But it sounded like you were saying guys got over on their talent alone without having an established guys lose to them.

Jeff hardy is the exception, not the rule, who got over with the crowd cuz he jumped off ladders through tables at ppv's.

Its the same reason why rey mysterio is over, and the same reason why sin cara is and will continue to be over because what they do in the ring is an amazing, larger than life, spectacle. Emphasis on "larger than life"

I feel like the iwc is quick to ignore that. Austin was over because his character was larger than life. Rocks mic skills and charisma were larger than life. Cena is larger than life. The spectacle that was a Shawn Michaels wrestlemania match was larger than life. Hogan slamming Andre the giant was larger than life. Jericho's abbrasive personality is so exaggerated that it becomes larger than life. Mick foleys bumps were larger than life. Triple h was larger than life. Undertaker is the epitome of larger than life. Kurt angle might not be larger tyan life, bit his Olympic hero persona was greatly exaggerated to make him larger than life. The spectacle of rey mysterio or sin cara flipping around off of any halfway solid surface is larger than life. Jeff hardy Swanton bombing off of 20 ft ladders through announce tables is larger than life. And the miz, well tye miz is a greatly exaggerated "bro" *****ebag that becomes larger than life. CM Punk is not larger than life. He's great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Daniel Bryan is great at what he does but he is not a spectacle. Jack swagger is not larger than life. John Morrison could be a spectacle if he'd get his personal act together and could cut half a promo. That's why the miz is a top guy and cm punk is jobbing to Orton. That's why Daniel Bryan is floating around in obscurity. That's why Drew McIntyre has disappeared. That's why dolph zigger hasn't gotten a steady main event push. These guys might be great at what they do but what they do isn't a larger than life spectacle. And that's what WWE is and pretty much always has been.

Jeff Hardy's an exception, I agree. But charisma is an important factor.

I do agree that the IWC does ignore the "larger than life" factor that comes into the business. That's why a lot of them will sit on their hands for someone who's a WWE Superstar despite how charismatic he is, but will applaud for an indy guy who hits 60 moves in a match, despite how that doesn't make him a star.

My problem with Miz is that he doesn't come across as larger than life. He's doing the *****ebag character but he's lacking something. The company's gotten behind him branded him which I won't argue with, but they haven't done a good job of making it look like he belongs up there with the top guys. While he isn't jobbing to Orton like CM Punk is, the way he was booked against Cena and Orton, he might as well have been jobbing to them, especially the way Orton vs Miz looked.

 

[The Sage]

But that goes back to the booking. If Cena was booked to fight Lawler closely, then he would lose credibility. The WWE made their Champion look weak. That was their own stupidity. It's a politics game, and the Miz isn't in a position where it would be wise for him to throw a fit like an HBK might have.

It does but that goes back to my point. Talent will only get you so far, the booking and the established guys who you lose to is also as important.

 

[Metallo]

So you're telling me Austin was over because he got "put over"? I disagree. Austin would have gotten himself over either way. I believe it is up to the star to get himself over and make the best of what he was given.

So you think Austin books the shows? You think Austin would have been just as popular as the Ringmaster? You weren't even watching then so how would you know?

If Austin had spent his entire WWE career losing like he did to Savio Vega he never would have been the star he was.

If he never BEAT Jake Roberts he NEVER would ahve cut the AUstin 3:16 promo.

Drew McIntyre has the look, and was given the push, but has no credibility because he did nothing with it to make himself stand out as a star. During the run up to his first title, and the accompanying reign, sheamus had the look and the push but no cred cuz he did nothing with it. Jack swagger was "put over" but now he's managing Michael freaking Cole cuz he did nothing with his opportunity.

AND???? I never said talent didn't matter. Once again you ignore all the other stuff I say to focus in one ONE thing.

Austin had the talent but WWE and other wrestlers gave him opportunities to show it. If WWE had never hired Austin I guess you think he would have gotten over and become a star too right?

Guys like Kurt angle or Chris Jericho put in tye work in the lower cards and made themselves stand out to the point that they had to be pushed into the main event. I dont care if Jericho had a bad title reign. He's credible as **** cuz he made himself and got himself over. Same with miz. Same reason why now sheamus is credible when he wasnt before.

The Miz doesn't have a TENTH of the talent that Chris Jericho had a decade ago. You're confusing GET over with PUT over. A guy can GET over to a certain extent but he's only goign to go so far until someone PUTS him over.

If Jericho wasn't allowed SOME things he wouldn't have become the star he did either. If HHH has said "I'm goign to squash you in ten seconds how would he have had TIME to ne a star.

Triple H's hatred of the Ultimate Warrior proves half the stuff youre saying here dead wrong. Even HE agrees that sometimes you NEED to be allowed to be shown in a stronger light instead of just jobbing with no good offense or wins.

I dont agree that hbk putting over Austin is what made him. Austin would have been a star regardless. He just would have taken a different path to get there.

A loser is still a loser. If Austin had lost every match he ever had he wouldn't have been the star that he became.

Really??! Really??!

Miz couldn't beat a "52 year old stroked out Bret Hart"? Um... In the *FICTIONAL* world of WWE, Bret isn't a "52 year old stroke victim", he's the best that is, the best that was, and the best that ever will be. The excellence of execution. THAT'S Bret Hart, not a 52 year old strokee.

Brets a retiree. and his middle aged. Anyone with any common sense can see that he's not in his prime. I'm a HUGE Fan but if he was the excellence of execution still he would be wearing his ring gear. He's not the best anymore. But you seem to be ignoring things like that to prop up your guy.

If he was the Bret Hart we all grew up watching he'd have stayed full time and defended that US title. How can you know what Bret Hart WAS when you never even watched him in his prime? Don't lecture me on what he isn't and isn't. I watched the guy through his ENTIRE WWE and WCW career.

The Miz cant draw for ****? According to who, exactly? You? I've been at 2 WWE events the past month including the grandest stage of them all, and I saw more Miz gear on the backs of fans than anyone not named Cena. EVERYONE that I talk to about wrestling from fans, co-workers, family, and people at WWE events or people down at the sports bar watching PPV's loves The Miz and has him among their current top favorites. He cant work? According to who?

If he could draw worth a damn why did WWE need the Rock, Austin and every other legend and old timer they could get to draw. Miz was in the main event so HE should have been one of the two big draws.

I guess you talked to the whole damn world to right? And if Miz was such a draw why was Raw not doing higher than 3.5 when Rock wasn't around and why did Miz need a lot of former top stars to draw for the show?

Until The Miz can Draw at the top ON HIS OWN...he ain't a draw. Did Austin need Hogan to show up at Wrestlemania 17 to help him draw?

So he sells some merch...a lot of guys sell merch.

What exactly are the standards of putting on a great match in a SCRIPTED / CHOREOGRAPHED theatrical event?

Uh...not stinking out he joint. A LOT of people said the Wrestlemania main event stuck...but I guess those people just don't exist right and only what YOU say matters. A lot of people were disappointed with the show. But Vinnie Mac ALREADY had their money after he used the Rock to lure people in.

Pedestrian mic skills? Again, according to who? "You two could fight in a Taco Bell parking lot for all I care" is better than anything CM Punk has ever said on a mic, and most every wrestling fan I encounter has similar feelings.

Better because YOU say so? No offense but I've listened to a hell of a lot of wrestling promos and yet you shortchange ALL the great promo guys over the last 30 years and talk about how great the Miz is when you've never even WATCHED half the guys you short change cut a promo. How can you say how much better Miz is when you don't even have a frame of reference?

a GREAT promo puts asses in seats and draws viewers. Show me where a Miz PROMO drew higher than a Foley, Rock, or Flair promo then you MIGHT have a point.

You always talk about the ENTERTAINMENT side well getting people to watch IS part of the entertainment side.

We get it. You hate Miz. He's not an Indy wrestler like Punk and came from MTV so hell never get the credit from the IWC that he deserves, but that doesn't mean he cant work and cant draw. His success the past year is pretty testiment too the fact that he can indeed work, and talk. Where all this talk of he cant do this or cant do that is coming from I'll never know.

Once again putting words in my mouth. A complete lack of respect and snark at someone with a different opinion. You accuse me of the same sh** you're doing right now.

Miz could be from the damn moon for all I care. I don't give a crap if he was on MTV as long as he's talented. And I'm not an indie guy. I've been watching WWE for over 25 years so that blows your point about me out of the water. I like wrestling PERIOD but I'm not some indie only fan.

Once again my brother put it best, and again paraphrasing; yes there are a handful of guys who stand out in the ring (hbk, Bret, triple h, sin cara, rey mysterio), and there's a few people who genuinely suck, but everyone else is pretty much par for the course. They dont stand out one way or another, they wrestle. Yea hbk and undertaker can put on a more exciting match than most, but its scripted, most of these guys are gonna go out there and do what they do. This whole "credibility" stuff is kinda redonk in a scripted event.

No its not. The guys who were to top dogs in the business won and LOOKED good doing it. Hogan was a character but he had something the Miz didn't. I'm talking about CHARACTER here not in ring work. Hogan knew how to SELL his character because a hell of a lot more people bought it than the Miz. Hogan had something that stood out the The Miz doesn't that makes his CHARACTER larger than life.

Its not about age and condition, its about how a CHARACTER is portrayed. In the WWE world, undertaker isn't old and beat up, hart isn't a stroke victim, and Miz isn't a "bad worker with no credibility".

If Hart wasn't a 52 year old stroke victim he'd be the Bret Hart we all remember. I guess you're going to tell me that Edge didn't REALLY break his neck either.

Bret Couldn't be portrayed exactly as he used to be 15 years ago. It wasn't possible. If he was The same old Bret Hart he'd be doing the same stuff he used to just as good. He wasn't. Wrestling is about a BLEND of fantasy and reality. Its not all fantasy. Thats the beauty of it.

The CHARACTER of Bret Hart was the guy who came out as the pink and black attack in the rights and all. He wasn't that exact same character anymore.

And as a Wrestlemania draw Miz is pretty sh** as a character. WWE calls it the Showcase of the Immortals"

Miz isn't anywhere near as god or as popular a character...

 

[Metallo]

I listed Bobby Lashley because WWE saw him as the future of their company. They gave him the world...and he walked away. If ANYONE was in line to end the streak, it was Lashley...and it would have been a MAJOR mistake for WWE to make.

Brock Lesnar was given the world. He was THE FUTURE of WWE. He was certainly a top choice to end The Streak...and if they had let him...he still would have left the company and they would have made a horrible decision and lost millions of dollars in potential revenue.

Just because some of us think a guy should get the rub from ending The Streak, that won't keep them from leaving WWE a few months later...

I'm talking about Lashley in relation to guys who had promise. Lashley really had NONE besides his look. Decent athlete but he could work and he had the face of a baby on Gerber's steroids and the voice of Piglet.

The problem with Lesnar and Lashley is they got pushed TOO soon. And Lashley more because of look than any truly outstanding talent.

I wouldn't have had Lesnar end the streak THEN I'm talking about if he was still around now. IF he has stayed and IF he was committed. I'm not saying the Lesnar of 2004 should have broken the streak.

I'm talking about based purely on skill and potential...not his decisions later on or his lack of commitment. IF they can get someone with Lesnars abilities and look who is COMMITTED to staying with WWE long term that is the kind of person that should be allowed to break the streak.

 

[Gotham Knight]

I would be splitting hairs to point out all of the flaws in your argument and stretching the page. So I"ll just point out the key, hypocritical ones, and then work my way to the false ones, like this:

Do you have a chart with how much merchandise he is selling? I thought not. LOTS of guys get reactions. Miz is getting what he's getting because of the exposure his reality tv background gave him. Not because of any reaction. He got those tv talk show spots because he was a Real World star who made big in WWE. THATS why Vince pushes him. But at the end of the day thats not going to draw money in the WWE.

Several of Miz's segments have LOST tv viewers over the last 6 months. Yeah he's REALLY drawing people in consistently at the top

And Cena is the cause for a loss of hundreds of fans with his Superman gimmick. A lot more than the Miz. And I'll get my chart of proof to back up that claim, when you get one to back up yours that the Miz has lost tv viewers. Do you have a chart? Or you don't have one which is why you didn't even guess on the number of viewers lost an just threw that out there? I'm guessing the latter, but maybe you'll surprise me.

I don't WATCH for Miz. Don't you get that? Like Blacklantern said the BRAND is drawing. Are you sitting outside my window watching exactly what I watch when Raw is on?

Why would Miz feud with Cena? To be fodder...or to be a placeholder because they are extremely low on veteran talent. What choice do they have?

So your argument is that he was a placeholder champion for over five months. Five. Sorry, but that's not the definition of a placeholder champion. If anything it's the opposite.

He was feuding with him because he's one of the most talented guys in the WWE. I wasn't a fan of his when he first came into the WWE. But even I can't deny the progress that he's shown. He's turned himself from a reality TV gimmick into a main eventing wrestler.

I don't WATCH for Miz. Don't you get that? Like Blacklantern said the BRAND is drawing. Are you sitting outside my window watching exactly what I watch when Raw is on?

Pot, meet kettle. As a matter of fact I am. I'm watching you watch thousands of other fans turn their TV's off when the Miz comes on their TV. At least, that's what you claimed. Where's that chart again?

The same way this business has ALWAYS made long term stars. Don't GIVE them the moon. make them WORK for it over a long period of time. Don't give them everything but give them fair opportunities to grow.

The same way Hogan, Austin, Sting, Hart, Taker, Savage, Michaels, Cena, Edge, Flair, Bruno, and every other star for the last 50 years has EARNED their place in the business. This isn't a hard thing to figure out. Do you think Hogan was just HANDED a top spot on the WWWF in 1977? No he toiled for years in other places and it was 7 years before Vince Jr chose him as THE guy for his new WWF.

We aren't talking about 1977. Although you did open my eyes on this one. I had no idea that Sheamus fought tooth and nail for 7 years before capturing the WWE Title. Good to know that things haven't changed in 34 years. Wait a minute....

And Miz STILL had a HARDER time beating Orton than Punk did beating Edge. Its not a draw. Miz has OFTEN been shown to look weaker than Most. He had trouble when feuding with Jerry Lawler, a 62 year old part time wrestler.

Uh, you do realize that Edge didn't get a single move in, don't you? All Punk did was hit his finisher.

Whereas Randy Orton was aware of the situation.

Doesn't matter if it was real. The WWE can't FORCE the audience to play along with their storylines. The people WANTED to see Cena and Rock and tuned in to see them. When neither one was involved and it was just The Miz people didn't care. Saying its not real doesn't matter. The PEOPLE decided The Miz was an afterthought more than the WWE did.

Pot, it's that time to meet the kettle again. Do you have a chart for this statistic too?

 

[Metallo]

People are saying that CM Punk should have ended The Streak this year...and now we're all wondering if he's even going to resign. So...let's say that Punk DID beat Taker at Mania...and a few months later decides to take a year or two off...what good did it do the company??? None.

Remember when Kennedy was a future top star? Maybe they should have let him end The Streak...so that TNA could profit off of his victory??

WWE KNOWS that they can make money off of a perfect Streak...they do not know what will happen if they end it. Therefore, they won't end it.

No people are saying if Taker goes 20-0 PUNK may as well be 20 because the can carry Taker to a good match and he may well be leaving anyway so it doesn't matter if he looses

Punk could be a candidate to break the Streak IF he stays long term and get as push.

The very reason Punk is leaving is because he's burnt out and has been working 5 years straight with little faith given to him by WWE.

Nobody said he should break the streak if he leaves but its easy to understand WHY he's leaving. Its a one sided relationship. WWE knows Punk can bust his ass working hard and they don't have to reward him by pushing him. Why should he stay if he's made and saved enough money to live good on?

 

[Gotham Knight]

It does but that goes back to my point. Talent will only get you so far, the booking and the established guys who you lose to is also as important.

Oh, without a doubt. But I think that people are too quick to call out WWE management(Don't get me wrong at ALL. They've screwed up on hidden gems too many times to count.)when the Wrestlers themselves have to take it upon themselves to earn a push. To make the fans listen to them and make the fans tells management who they're really interested in.

Granted, it's certainly harder to do in this PG era. Everyone is on a short leash nowadays, so it's harder to break away and really stand out from the crowd. However, if you can entice the crowd on the mic, they'll eat it up. And if you have the skills in the ring and the charisma, you're set.

 

[BlackLantern]

I'm talking about Lashley in relation to guys who had promise. Lashley really had NONE besides his look. Decent athlete but he could work and he had the face of a baby on Gerber's steroids and the voice of Piglet.

The problem with Lesnar and Lashley is they got pushed TOO soon. And Lashley more because of look than any truly outstanding talent.

I wouldn't have had Lesnar end the streak THEN I'm talking about if he was still around now. IF he has stayed and IF he was committed. I'm not saying the Lesnar of 2004 should have broken the streak.

I'm talking about based purely on skill and potential...not his decisions later on or his lack of commitment. IF they can get someone with Lesnars abilities and look who is COMMITTED to staying with WWE long term that is the kind of person that should be allowed to break the streak.

you're not going to find that these days....these days there are many more options for a guy who may or may not head to the WWE...MMA being the main one

 

[Metallo]

I would be splitting hairs to point out all of the flaws in your argument and stretching the page. So I"ll just point out the key, hypocritical ones, and then work my way to the false ones, like this:
And Cena is the cause for a loss of hundreds of fans with his Superman gimmick.

Hundreds of fans from where? WWE was losing viewers before Cena ever got the push. This goes back to their poor booking problems increasing after Austin and Rock left and HHH began his reign of monotony.

A lot more than the Miz. And I'll get my chart of proof to back up that claim, when you get one to back up yours that the Miz has lost tv viewers. Do you have a chart? Or you don't have one which is why you didn't even guess on the number of viewers lost an just threw that out there? I'm guessing the latter, but maybe you'll surprise me.

Ratings data is posted by every site from Wrestlezone to PWInsider I'm pretty sure last weeks ratings data said Miz LOST some viewers on Raw. Go look it up with your own eyes if you don't believe me.

So your argument is that he was a placeholder champion for over five months. Five. Sorry, but that's not the definition of a placeholder champion. If anything it's the opposite.

He was at first but that time extended once WWE got mainstream media attention. THAT is what you seem to be ignoring. JBL held the title for longer than but he WAS a transitional champion. He was never intended to be a main draw. If Miz WAS a draw they wouldn't have needed the Rock. They may be using Rock to give Miz the rub but Miz was NOT the draw that a legit champion usually is.

He was feuding with him because he's one of the most talented guys in the WWE. I wasn't a fan of his when he first came into the WWE. But even I can't deny the progress that he's shown. He's turned himself from a reality TV gimmick into a main eventing wrestler.

He was feuding with him because he has a mouth and he got mainstream press and Vince LOVES that more than anything else. He may be wrestling in the main event but he's not a legit main even wrestler. The guy isn't a draw on the Hogan/Rock/Austin/Flair level no matter how much you love him.

Ronnie Garvin was NWA champion for 2 months...are you gonna tell me he was a star because he held it longer than some guys have too?

Pot, meet kettle. As a matter of fact I am. I'm watching you watch thousands of other fans turn their TV's off when the Miz comes on their TV. At least, that's what you claimed. Where's that chart again?

I'm speaking only for myself when I said I change the channel so thats not a pot or kettle or anything. The ratings data is online for you to find EASILY. Use this thing called GOOGLE. You'll believe your own eyes better than you'll believe me.

We aren't talking about 1977. Although you did open my eyes on this one. I had no idea that Sheamus fought tooth and nail for 7 years before capturing the WWE Title. Good to know that things haven't changed in 34 years. Wait a minute....

If we are talking about how to properly build up stars then we ARE talking about right now. That hasn't changed in 30 years. It takes TIME natural talent and a good investment by creative to make a good star.

I didn't say Sheamus I said HOGAN. And that just proves my point. Sheamus had the title handed to him in his first 6 months and his reign ws a bust. Hogan had to earn the business for 7 years before be became a world champion and it payed off. Do you think Sheamus was a bigger sucess story than Hogan?

Uh, you do realize that Edge didn't get a single move in, don't you? All Punk did was hit his finisher.

Uh...you realize thats my point right? It was EASIER for him to beat Edge. Miz had a destroyed Orton handed to him on a silver platter and still had trouble defeating him. Even by MITB standards it was a WEAK win.

Whereas Randy Orton was aware of the situation.

And Randy Orton was STILL injured and should have been easy pickings. Yet the Miz basically wrestled a FULL match even after he had the beatdown and MITB advantage.

Pot, it's that time to meet the kettle again. Do you have a chart for this statistic too?

Check out comments on WWE's OWN SITE where people said they were more interested in Rock vs Cena than Rock vs Miz. Or the Miz ADMITTING on air that people thought he was an afterthought.

If people weren't SAYING it why the hell would WWE WRITE IT IN on Raw? You don't ADMIT your CHAMPION is an afterthought unless you know how to use that in a storyine..which they tried to do.