Unpopular wrestling opinions

CSF

Moneymaker wrote: »

The Bella's have been fine recently for me personally.

It's when they were doing 10 minute+ segments that it was real train wreck TV.

At least they realised how badly they bombed and changed things up.

Nikki is a good heel imo.

Agreed on Nikki. I find Brie unbearable though, has she ever really known if she's face or heel?

CSF

I think the Stone Cold heel turn at Wrestlemania 2001 was a good thing.

SureYWouldntYa

Don't think Ambrose is that amazing, can see him becoming a main event player but not a permanent one, sorta like Punk he'll be jumping up and down the card

laoch na mona

SureYWouldntYa wrote: »

Don't think Ambrose is that amazing, can see him becoming a main event player but not a permanent one, sorta like Punk he'll be jumping up and down the card

i'm not big on his mic work it seems much to forced like i get it your hardcore now turn it down a bit

leggo

laoch na mona wrote: »

i'm not big on his mic work it seems much to forced like i get it your hardcore now turn it down a bit

I'd have the exact opposite view: other lads don't do enough stuff to differentiate themselves, so Ambrose being different shouldn't be notable. Everyone should have their own unique tics and drawls, instead 90% of the roster goes into 'generic, safe promo mode' so the likes of Ambrose and Wyatt stand out when they both would've been standard fare in the Attitude Era.

laoch na mona

leggo wrote: »

I'd have the exact opposite view: other lads don't do enough stuff to differentiate themselves, so Ambrose being different shouldn't be notable. Everyone should have their own unique tics and drawls, instead 90% of the roster goes into 'generic, safe promo mode' so the likes of Ambrose and Wyatt stand out when they both would've been standard fare in the Attitude Era.

I think wyatt is great and I love their feud so it might just be me judging him unfairly compared to wyatt

bobby_says_hi

As far as British Divas go, Layla entertains me in the ring way more than Paige

Insect Overlord

bobby_says_hi wrote: »

As far as British Divas go, Layla entertains me in the ring way more than Paige

Doesn't Layla have about 10 years more TV experience than Paige?

Hashtag_HEEL

An File wrote: »

Doesn't Layla have about 10 years more TV experience than Paige?

And about 18 years of life experience too

DEFTLEFTHAND

Dusty despised the Goldust gimmick for his son Dustin, now they have his other boy Cody at it also.

Having southern boys play up to being flamboyant queers is a rib on Dusty. I imagine Vince gets a great laugh out of it.

Soft Falling Rain

Flamboyant queers is a bit strong no? I don't think Goldie has played up to the homosexual aspect of his character in quite awhile.

I will say though that I'm not a fan of applying the gimmick to Cody. There was no need for it, that is unless it was his idea.

leggo

That's a consequence of Cody not coming up with something better for himself than "I'll grow a moustache" or "I'll team with my brother". If you leave it to Vince to decide your gimmick, that's the risk you take. Lads have to be responsible for creating their own destiny.

Rock Lesnar

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I will say though that I'm not a fan of applying the gimmick to Cody. There was no need for it, that is unless it was his idea.

Well to be fair hes more over with the fans now then he was before so you could say there was a need for a change and this seems to have worked.

Hashtag_HEEL

I enjoy the Dust brothers being together because as I've been hoping for the last two manias, we'll have Brother VS Brother.

Cody could be a star if given a proper push. They guy has been turning chicken s#it into chicken salad for quite a while now since he left legacy.

Ultimately they should've pulled the trigger on him either after the fued with Sandow or after the fued with the authority.

ShagNastii

I think we'll certainly at some stage get that much touted Rhodes brothers fued. Would be nice to peak at Mania but timing might not allow it. Hopefully one of them loses the facade.

If it's Dustin Rhodes VS Stardust or Goldust VS Cody could be class. So much to pick from. Throw in Dusty and it could be white hot.

CSF

ShagNastii wrote: »

I think we'll certainly at some stage get that much touted Rhodes brothers fued. Would be nice to peak at Mania but timing might not allow it. Hopefully one of them loses the facade.

If it's Dustin Rhodes VS Stardust or Goldust VS Cody could be class. So much to pick from. Throw in Dusty and it could be white hot.

Nobody is gonna care too much now though, and it'll be pure wrestlecrap. They really should have done it at the height of their Shield feud awesomeness.

Stereomaniac

It should have been done as soon as they lost the championships to the New Age Outlaws I think.

Moneymaker

Everytime Cody gets hot, they give up on him.

2012 he was gaining momentum, they just give up on him. He made the IC title relevant again and nothing comes of it.

2013, he was over as hell with Sandow and that years MITB the crowd was 100% behind him.

The feud with the Authority should have been a break out moment for him.

Nope, Big Show has to come along and Cody is forgotten about -_-

He gets over as Stardust, WWE make him and Goldust job every week.

So frustrating. :mad:

Omackeral

I loved when him and Goldust were taking on the Authority as outside renegade invaders through the crowd in hoodies. Only thing I would have done is have Goldie come in without the paint and have him as Dustin 'Goldust' Rhodes and have the two boys go officially as the Rhodes Dynasty protecting and honoring their family name with Dusty cornering them on occasion. Two p*ssed off Southern boys with an axe to grind.

leggo

Everyone is saying he got hot, but when is this? Show me amazing crowd reactions for him in the way Ambrose, Ziggler and Sandow have gotten recently. I can remember his MITB match with Sandow (the feud never kept the audience's interest), the tag stuff against The Shield (which again died once The Shield moved on) aaaaand...nope, that's it. He did what was asked of him, read his script, but never added any individual spark to it. So why should they break their backs trying to make him interesting when he's not arsed or talented enough to do so himself.

He can have good matches, but he struggles in getting and staying over. The latter is his job. Anyone can get over with good booking, it's when you're staying over while WWE are focusing elsewhere and just saying "Yeah you just do your thing" (think Sandow right now) that you're someone they should pay attention to. Cody has nobody to blame for his stumbles but himself.

A Rogue Hobo

leggo wrote: »

Everyone is saying he got hot, but when is this? Show me amazing crowd reactions for him in the way Ambrose, Ziggler and Sandow have gotten recently. I can remember his MITB match with Sandow (the feud never kept the audience's interest), the tag stuff against The Shield (which again died once The Shield moved on) aaaaand...nope, that's it. He did what was asked of him, read his script, but never added any individual spark to it. So why should they break their backs trying to make him interesting when he's not arsed or talented enough to do so himself.

He can have good matches, but he struggles in getting and staying over. The latter is his job. Anyone can get over with good booking, it's when you're staying over while WWE are focusing elsewhere and just saying "Yeah you just do your thing" (think Sandow right now) that you're someone they should pay attention to. Cody has nobody to blame for his stumbles but himself.

The crowd was huge behind him in the actual MITB match, huge "Cody" chants during the match. It was the booking of the feud with Sandow afterwards which killed him. If I recall correctly, he was turned face and his motivation was that Sandow cost him the MITB match at one stage even though he said he would have done the same. It made zero sense and the crowd were just confused by it and lost all interest.

leggo

Steve Austin was The Ringmaster. The Rock was Rocky Maivia. Triple H was Hunter Hearst Helmsley. Ambrose was the other guy in The Shield split. Daniel Bryan was in a comedy tag-team. Punk couldn't buy a main event even as champion. Sandow was given yet another impersonation gimmick which was supposed to just last until the next PPV.

Creative's job is to use the talent available to make the best show possible, not to make Cody Rhodes a star if he's not doing anything to ensure he has people's attention once he's given the ball. If he just reads his lines and is happy to have a job, exactly what happened will happen every single time. It's like someone just clocking in and out of work without ever going out of their way to impress the bosses then feeling aggrieved when they get looked over for a promotion. All of the above changed their own luck. ALL of them.

You want to do better? Do better then. Don't stand around and wait for everyone to realise how amazing you are, they're all busy worrying about doing their own jobs to care about how you're doing in yours. Make it their business to care.

laoch na mona

there is the dilemma that if they go to far outside the script they'll get themselves in **** with the boss, it's not like when the rock or Steve Austin were about. it's much more scripted now. I honestly see that as what's holding people back, there's a backstage atmosphere which doesn't encourage individual creativity

leggo

I get what you mean but I disagree. Actors read off lines from a script all the time, there's plenty of scope for them to stand out without having to go off-script. And that's why I brought up Ambrose and Sandow who've both done the job within the current confines.

Ambrose said himself this week on Jericho's podcast that he realised after The Shield split that he was just being left to do his own thing with very little input or direction from creative and saw an opportunity to shine in that. Like I said, Sandow's deal was part of hundreds of other impersonation gimmicks he'd been asked to do and was likely only scheduled to last a week or two, but he took this ball and ran with it because he saw an opportunity. WWE didn't particularly put much effort into either's initial push, but when they saw what the lads did with it it led to Vince standing in an office thinking up ways for Ambrose to beat up a mannequin and Sandow doing an acting series on YouTube.

As I said in the Devitt thread, promoters want all of their wrestlers to succeed and make them money. But wrestlers have to meet them halfway and, through their performances, give them a reason to push them. Cody has never shown he can do this aside from a few fleeting moments of promise (again, going back to Ambrose's excellent interview, he makes a point about how some talent can't stay over once an initial storyline runs its course). I get why fans are conditioned to blame creative as a reflex - it's a consequence of watching failed wrestlers who lack introspection moaning about how they got screwed out of millions in shoot interviews - but they need to learn that the onus is on talent to look after their own careers and pushes.

laoch na mona

ya there is scope but the atmosphere backstage is not one which encourages wrestles to take the initiative. It's hard to agree wrestlers should be responsible for their own pushes when creative is such a large part of the wwe. if creative was cut back and wrestlers were giving more creative control then we could really see what wrestlers are capable off.

As it is it's hard to blame wrestlers for being cautious or unambitious when everything is decided for them and backstage politics dictates who gets pushed more than crowd reaction.

leggo

You're assuming a lot there. Who says there's no encouragement to take the initiative? Not Dean Ambrose. Not Damien Sandow. Sure they have scripts, but again so do actors. It's not a script's fault if they can't act. It's not a script's fault if they work better off improv. They knew the job they were signing on for when they signed their contract (it's been that way for years now), if they can't succeed in said job then that's not the fault of the employer. WWE, like all employers, want to push a particular guy who does the job they want them to do. They don't have to bend the way they run things to accommodate an unproven talent.

Again, you have to compare this to a regular job to really get a handle on who's to blame here. When there are people breaking out who are showing themselves to be above average and then there are people complaining they can't catch a break, you have to look at the latter and say that they're just whining (or in this case people are whining on their behalf) while not being good enough for the opportunities they claim they deserve. It's like saying, "Joe didn't get a promotion," and having someone point out that Joe doesn't do anything beyond exactly what's asked of him, then using, "Yeah...but he's sound..." as a defence. Why does someone deserve extra money or opportunities if they're not giving anything extra to the role they're currently being paid for?

The point doesn't stand up to scrutiny when there are people in the company right now proving that point wrong.

WinnyThePoo

I agree with everything you have said Leggo. I'm a cody mark, so I want to see him do well. I thought when legacy finished his initial run on Smackdown was very good. I do think he will never be near the top level, but he could certainly in the future get to where Ziggler is.

laoch na mona

leggo wrote: »

You're assuming a lot there. Who says there's no encouragement to take the initiative? Not Dean Ambrose. Not Damien Sandow. Sure they have scripts, but again so do actors. It's not a script's fault if they can't act. It's not a script's fault if they work better off improv. They knew the job they were signing on for when they signed their contract (it's been that way for years now), if they can't succeed in said job then that's not the fault of the employer. WWE, like all employers, want to push a particular guy who does the job they want them to do. They don't have to bend the way they run things to accommodate an unproven talent.

Again, you have to compare this to a regular job to really get a handle on who's to blame here. When there are people breaking out who are showing themselves to be above average and then there are people complaining they can't catch a break, you have to look at the latter and say that they're just whining (or in this case people are whining on their behalf) while not being good enough for the opportunities they claim they deserve. It's like saying, "Joe didn't get a promotion," and having someone point out that Joe doesn't do anything beyond exactly what's asked of him, then using, "Yeah...but he's sound..." as a defence. Why does someone deserve extra money or opportunities if they're not giving anything extra to the role they're currently being paid for?

The point doesn't stand up to scrutiny when there are people in the company right now proving that point wrong.

there are a few exception who manage to work with the backstage politics to get a push who also happen to be great athletes yes but they are not the norm, so either the best pro wrestling company has a roster of mostly mediocre talent or the WWE is simple not the meritocracy you think it is, considering meritocracies rarely if ever exist the latter is more likely

leggo

I'm saying that it's a workplace. And, like all workplaces, politics may exist but that is a factor of any working environment. To succeed in a job you must deal with the necessary factors that affect your success or failure in said job and be judged on that. If you're not smart enough to do the job your boss wants well enough, use your initiative to stay ahead, or point out your strongpoints...you're not smart enough to deserve a promotion. That's all it comes down to. Harsh but true.

But live crowd reactions aren't dictated by politics and Cody has never gotten the type of reactions that, say, Daniel Bryan got at the Royal Rumble last year where fans refused to let him be forgotten about. He wasn't on the main show of TLC last night and nobody batted an eyelid. He isn't skilled enough to get and stay over for a sustained period, or have fans care that he's not getting the push he deserves (in the same way they do for Cesaro or Ziggler). It's on him, whether you like him or not. And, hey, I like Cody too. But he's exactly where he should be on the card right now. That could change, but he needs to first.

laoch na mona

honestly I don't care about cody, I was highlighting how it's unfair to blame individual wrestlers for problems in the organisation