Originally Posted by WashingtonD
Over the last six months or so, I've noticed a double standard from so called "smarks", that exposes them for what they truly are.. just "marks".
Look at when Bryan/Punk were feuding for the WWE title. Their angle had virtually no storyline at first, until the inclusion of AJ which in any other storyline, would have immediately soured it. But, because this is Punk and Bryan, it was automatically a great feud. I remember people saying their match at Over The Limit was 5 stars, and even before the match had happened people were saying it would be a match of the year candidate.. lots of you were calling for this feud to keep going on til Summerslam, where they would have the final blow off match. By my calculations, thats a lot of PPVs
Now, look at Sheamus and Del Rio. They're on onto their THIRD one-on-one PPV match in a row, one less than the FOUR that many of you were calling CM Punk-Bryan to have from Over The Limit to Summerslam, and added to that, their feud has an actual storyline, however weak it may be. So why is 3 PPV matches too much for Sheamus and Del Rio, but too little for Punk and Bryan?
I know the real reason why.. because you're all marks. The difference between a mark and a smark is that a smark, or a "smart mark", is someone who is "smart to the business" - that they can review and criticise things objectively from a business standpoint. A "mark" is someone who cheers for their favourites and gets tangled up.
Of course, that does not negate Sheamus-Del Rio being overkill, and I am inclined to agree, but the fact is a lot of you are saying their feud is too much yet demanding more matches between wrestlers you DO like? Get it now? That's being a mark.
So in your strivance to be "smart", a lot of you just come across as marks. Not that there is anything wrong with that mind you - I like to be a mark myself sometimes as well, it's all part of the fun of wrestling, and if you completely remove yourself from "marking out", then what is the point of watching wrestling?. Also, don't confuse being "smart" to the business, with intelligence, think of it as "aware".
I hate idiots like you who lump the "IWC" into a collective body with no thought process behind it whatsoever. First of all, the IWC is simply a term for people who talk about wrestling on the internet. That sir would make you part of the IWC, whether you like it or not. There is no "collective". You are one of these delousional idiots who talk about how the IWC has certain favourites, and certain things they do and don't like, throwing pretty much everyone under the banner without thinking that people have individual opinions.
Its a sort of us and them mentality you are bringing to the table which doesn't exist. The fact that you are trying to appear "smarter to the business" or a more of a smark than the "IWC" this collective you have just thrown people under when you don't even realise that you YOURSELF are a part of the IWC is absolutely hilarious.
For your information I have seen absolutely a huge amount of posts about how AJ ruined the "pure" wrestling feud that Punk and Bryan had, how she tarnished and completely ruined the whole rivalry. I have also seen a few posts of people who are enjoying the Del Rio/Sheamus feud still. So your argument, regardless of how well structured or good it is completely floored simply because you think the IWC is an umbrella of the same opinion which you are trying to desperately get away from. It's embarrassing.