Your unpopular opinions

[Farooq]

I think CM Punk is overrated
Fuck Khali piece of fucking shit wrestler
I liked Fandango from the very very start, when everyone was hating on him heavily(fucking hypocrites now, and Im talking about the IWC in general, not here)
Kofi Kingston is one of my top favorite wrestlers, despite how WWE treats him.
While I'm a huge fan of ECW, I wish everybody would just let it fucking die already.
Goldberg is a below average wrestler to me, I do not wish for him to come back, because I think he fucking sucks and he would not entertain me unless he fights Sin Cara in a botch match.
I love Cena, I wish he would put people over, but whenever he wins and the IWC bitch about, it's just so much more entertaining.
I enjoy watching ADR and Swagger, whether it's against each other or other opponents.
I'm a fan of Big E
I'm a fan of Jinder Mahal
Roman Reigns is my favorite from the Shield.

 

[David5150]

I honestly have always hated Randy Orton. He is a bad guy and always has been, with the stiff punching and the sexual harassment and shitting in divas purses (Cause he doesn't respect them) Randy Orton is seriously one of the biggest dick in WWE, if his dad wasn't a legend, he would have been long gone.

 

[Lockard 23]

-I don't think Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler are the gods that they are made out to be by the IWC. I especially laugh when people think they could be the next face of the WWE (i.e the guy Cena passes the torch to), especially Bryan. I just get frustrated when people acknowledge this will never happen only because WWE 'isn't brought enough' to allow it to happen.

-Speaking of which, the idea of Bryan/Brock at Wrestlemania is a laughable idea to me, though it entertains some. Throw it on a B-PPV if anywhere.

-Cody Rhodes is someone I don't understand the love for. He's average in everything - his look, his charisma/mic skills, ring work, etc.

-Randy Orton isn't quite as bad as people make him out to be. He's stale these days because he's booked as such, but he's pretty damn good in the ring.

-As mentioned, Sheamus isn't quite as bad as people make him out to be either. He's somewhat boring on the mic but he's never really boring in the ring, which makes criticism of him strange since a lot here always put such value on ring work (I recall saying that Del Rio was boring shortly before his face turn, and a few people responded by saying "but he's one of the best in the ring the WWE has.")

-I actually am a fan of HHH. I admit he has an ego and I don't like him getting wins where it isn't warranted (CM Punk, Brock Lesnar) but otherwise, I've long mellowed on my hate for him. Looking back, I don't even mind his "reign of terror" in 2003 all that much. Maybe knowing the WWE has a bright future with him steering the ship has what made me mellow on him a bit.

-I have no real issue with "superfaces" for the most part. Faces being booked strongly has always been done, going back to the days of Hogan and beyond. It's not a new concept and I don't get the hate for things like Sheamus going so long as an undefeated world champion, for example. Even Del Rio got the criticism earlier this year for this, and he wasn't even two whole months into his title reign yet! It's also hypocritical considering people are all for long undefeated streaks when it comes to heels (i.e The Shield.) And if you want to be objective, I'm not sure there's any numbers that can be brought up to show that long face reigns even cause people to tune out. Some of Cena's best numbers in his main event career was in 2007 when he was working his longest WWE Title reign ever.

 

[Rysenberg]

Hulk Hogan was a master of in ring psychology during his babyface run. Also Ziggler can't sell for shit, fine bumper but he's never sold an injury.

Can you not refer to that as selling as well though? You're still selling the opponent and his move, just in a different way.

 

[Stopspot]

Can you not refer to that as selling as well though? You're still selling the opponent and his move, just in a different way.

Bumping is bumping, selling is selling.

Bump
To fall on the mat or ground.[1][4] A flat back bump is a bump in which a wrestler lands solidly on his back with high impact, spread over as much surface as possible.[1] A phantom bump occurs when a wrestler or referee takes a bump even though the move they are selling was visibly botched or otherwise not present.[1]

Sell
To react to an opponent's attacks in a manner that suggests to the audience that the attacks actually hurt.[1]

Dolph is a great bumper but I can understand those saying he isn't that good a seller. He tends to just get right back up after a bump unless it is ridiculously big.

 

[Snowman1]

-As mentioned, Sheamus isn't quite as bad as people make him out to be either. He's somewhat boring on the mic but he's never really boring in the ring, which makes criticism of him strange since a lot here always put such value on ring work (I recall saying that Del Rio was boring shortly before his face turn, and a few people responded by saying "but he's one of the best in the ring the WWE has.")

-I actually am a fan of HHH. I admit he has an ego and I don't like him getting wins where it isn't warranted (CM Punk, Brock Lesnar) but otherwise, I've long mellowed on my hate for him. Looking back, I don't even mind his "reign of terror" in 2003 all that much. Maybe knowing the WWE has a bright future with him steering the ship has what made me mellow on him a bit.

Totally agree with a lot of what you say. Guys being overused/underused are a big part of what makes an internet darling/villain. Sheamus is as good a worker as Wade Barrett is, and one's the "most overpushed guy on the roster" while the other "deserves a push yesterday".

Looking back on it, as much as we all know about HHH's infamous ego, who's made more stars (outside of maybe Foley)? Randy and Batista became BIG stars from Evolution. He jobbed clean to Cena at WM22 and put him over in a BIG way. Shoot, he jobbed to Shelton 3 straight times...

 

[Rysenberg]

-I don't think Daniel Bryan and Dolph Ziggler are the gods that they are made out to be by the IWC. I especially laugh when people think they could be the next face of the WWE (i.e the guy Cena passes the torch to), especially Bryan. I just get frustrated when people acknowledge this will never happen only because WWE 'isn't brought enough' to allow it to happen.

-Speaking of which, the idea of Bryan/Brock at Wrestlemania is a laughable idea to me, though it entertains some. Throw it on a B-PPV if anywhere.

Disagree. Bryan/Brock is a potentially fantastic fued for me. Nobody is better at working the underdog atm than Daniel Bryan, and the crowd absolutely adore him. The crowd would easily get invested in a storyline between the two. Brock/Bryan could sell better than Trips Bork will/did I reckon.

-Cody Rhodes is someone I don't understand the love for. He's average in everything - his look, his charisma/mic skills, ring work, etc.

Agreed. Although I'd put him as an above average ring worker I guess.

-Randy Orton isn't quite as bad as people make him out to be. He's stale these days because he's booked as such, but he's pretty damn good in the ring.

Urgh, I dunno with him. He's a decent worker with a good look, and most of all he's over. Personally I think the guy's a complete dick and therefore I'd happily see him fired tomorrow, but talent wise as a heel he probably is a main eventer. Although I think his midcard run is completely justified given his recent drug incidents.

-As mentioned, Sheamus isn't quite as bad as people make him out to be either. He's somewhat boring on the mic but he's never really boring in the ring, which makes criticism of him strange since a lot here always put such value on ring work (I recall saying that Del Rio was boring shortly before his face turn, and a few people responded by saying "but he's one of the best in the ring the WWE has.")

Sheamus has definitely gone up in my estimations (I bet he feels honoured) over the last year or so. Looking back on it, although he's worked with pretty much all the best workers there is, he has had a number of great matches over the last year. I certainly don't view him as a bad ring worker.

-I actually am a fan of HHH. I admit he has an ego and I don't like him getting wins where it isn't warranted (CM Punk, Brock Lesnar) but otherwise, I've long mellowed on my hate for him. Looking back, I don't even mind his "reign of terror" in 2003 all that much. Maybe knowing the WWE has a bright future with him steering the ship has what made me mellow on him a bit.

Urghh, no. The guy's not done anything special since turning face IMO. He's an above average worker, a half decent talker, and if he'd just retired to an out of ring heel dictator role in 2011 I'd have no issue with the guy. But beating Punk, having multiple matches with Taker, this crappy fued with Brock and just generally feeling the need to get one over on younger heels just makes him so irritating.

-I have no real issue with "superfaces" for the most part. Faces being booked strongly has always been done, going back to the days of Hogan and beyond. It's not a new concept and I don't get the hate for things like Sheamus going so long as an undefeated world champion, for example. Even Del Rio got the criticism earlier this year for this, and he wasn't even two whole months into his title reign yet! It's also hypocritical considering people are all for long undefeated streaks when it comes to heels (i.e The Shield.) And if you want to be objective, I'm not sure there's any numbers that can be brought up to show that long face reigns even cause people to tune out. Some of Cena's best numbers in his main event career was in 2007 when he was working his longest WWE Title reign ever.

It's simple: 95% of post adolescents are uninterested in these types of characters. They're outdated. Look at all the really great TV programmes, the majority of the protagonists in those programmes are not ashley that great as people when you analyse their actions - but you support them more for it. People are tired of cookie cutters, characters need more depth in this day and age and they seemed to be addressing that back in the Attitude Era, but for some reason WWE has taken a few steps back and reverted to their tedious, outdated ways. Honestly, in 2013, faces and heels should hardly exist IMO.

 

[Lockard 23]

Looking back on it, as much as we all know about HHH's infamous ego, who's made more stars (outside of maybe Foley)? Randy and Batista became BIG stars from Evolution. He jobbed clean to Cena at WM22 and put him over in a BIG way. Shoot, he jobbed to Shelton 3 straight times...

He's made stars, but I wouldn't use Shelton as a big example of who he's lost to cleanly. He lost via roll up and count out but the 'feud' between them went nowhere after that and did nothing for Shelton in the long run. I also don't forgive him for everything that went down during the 2002-2005 period. RVD is someone who could have used the win and elevation. And he still made sure he was the #1 star of the show during Benoit's title reign in 2004. And then, the burial of Orton, intentional or otherwise...

 

[Rysenberg]

Bumping is bumping, selling is selling.





Dolph is a great bumper but I can understand those saying he isn't that good a seller. He tends to just get right back up after a bump unless it is ridiculously big.

Since we're being pedantic here, reacting to an opponent's attacks in a manner that suggests to the audience that the attacks genuinely hurt would not be what Dolph is doing? By flopping all over the place, he's trying to convince the audience that what happened to him genuinely hurt.

 

[Lockard 23]

Disagree. Bryan/Brock is a potentially fantastic fued for me. Nobody is better at working the underdog atm than Daniel Bryan, and the crowd absolutely adore him. The crowd would easily get invested in a storyline between the two. Brock/Bryan could sell better than Trips Bork will/did I reckon.

It wouldn't be a bad feud but it's not Wrestlemania caliber and certainly wouldn't sell like HHH/Brock. Masses of people wouldn't come out for Brock/Bryan (remember WM draws in non-wrestling fans as well.) He's a guy who has a gimmick beard who people chant YES at or with (it gets chanted because it's easy to chant, same thing with the What chant surviving so long) and he looks like a midget upside Lesnar. It doesn't have the larger-than-life clash to it that WWE wants the top matches at Wrestlemania to have.

Being an over mid carder doesn't mean you automatically have what it takes to work a main event-caliber program with someone like Lesnar.

 

[Crayo]

R Albin styling on anyone and everyone here.

 

[Rysenberg]

It wouldn't be a bad feud but it's not Wrestlemania caliber and certainly wouldn't sell like HHH/Brock. Masses of people wouldn't come out for Brock/Bryan (remember WM draws in non-wrestling fans as well.) He's a guy who has a gimmick beard who people chant YES at or with (it gets chanted because it's easy to chant, same thing with the What chant surviving so long) and he looks like a midget upside Lesnar. It doesn't have the larger-than-life clash to it that WWE wants the top matches at Wrestlemania to have.


Being an over mid carder doesn't mean you automatically have what it takes to work a main event-caliber program with someone like Lesnar.

The Beard and the hair need to be cut, and the comedy character dropped if this were to ever happen, I think we can all agree on that. It doesn't need to be the main draw, much like Triple H/Brock this year. I seriously doubt anybody paid their money to watch that match, Taker/Punk and Cena/Rock were the ones people paid their money for, especially the latter.

The Taker/Punk match also links into my point in a way as well. Punk isn't exactly a larger than life character, and for a while he could be described as nothing more than an over midcarder. Eventually though he got his big break, the shoot. I'm not suggesting that Bryan facing/defeating Brock would be as big as the shoot was for Punk, but it could get him permanently into a main event slot. It's not gonna be the big seller of the PPV, Cena/Rock/Taker can do that by themselves - it would however, benefit them long term by potentially creating a new star.

R Albin styling on anyone and everyone here.

I know what that means now as well :yay:

 

[Lockard 23]

I'd say HHH/Brock was easily the bigger sell for the PPV than Taker/Punk. Look at which build was more serious (hint: the one that involved Vince) and which build was half-assed. Taker's matches will always draw based on the streak, regardless of who the opponent is. Let's not forget the numbers they did for Summerslam, which is one of the main reasons why the match happened again in the first place.

I agree that Brock/Bryan could make Bryan look like more of a legitimate star but that's why I'd do it on a lesser PPV than Wrestlemania. I also wouldn't put Bryan over in a million years. I'd book it as Bryan putting up a good fight, maybe even locking a submission hold or two on Lesnar and getting him to scream in pain (would be cool to see Bryan break out some submissions we haven't seen from him yet) and keep on fighting despite the punishment he takes but in the end, he still falls to Lesnar. He'd be put over well enough just by hanging with someone like Lesnar that long. It is a dangerous (though if he wants to be taken more seriously, necessary) thing for him to get away from the comedy bits of his personality though, because it's the reason he's over in the first place.

 

[acailler]

Kaitlyn. I love her.

 

[Aids Johnson]

Big fan of ADR, Love how Y2J has a big entrance at least twice a year, big fan of him vs fandango, and am a huge fan of Ryder.