Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownieDude
The whole premise of being credible is too overblown. Punk was about as credible as Snitsky's dentist when he won the WHC.
I don't believe that HHH/Khali will draw as much, at least in the U.S.A, as much as people think. I know casuals, and they see face/face matches as the ones worth paying for. They don't appreciate the finer dynamics that the more educated fans do.
If we are going to continue the flip side debate, here's an alternate angle. You say MVP being in the main event is unjustified due to his lack of credibility. I would argue that being in the ME GIVES him credibility. Its a battle royale; all MVP has to do is stay outside the ring and dump Jeff Hardy over from nowhere to win. Its pretty clear SD aren't looking at this match to draw or they would have thrown Big Show in there. Edge was a title contender when he never went over anyone clean and won Battle royales in similar fashion.
|
Punk is an extreme exception because WWE wanted to "shake things up". Had they not felt the need to shake things up, Punk would have likely been built up properly and then eventually capture the World Championship. There are no comparison between MVP and Punk.
You're kidding yourself if you don't think casuals will eat this feud/match up. Hell, they ate up the Khali/Cena match big time and even Taker/Khali.
If he were to win the battle royal that way, how does that build credibility? That just tells the fans that MVP wasn't as good as the rest of the battle royal participants so he had to cheat. An angle like that only works if the guy is already an established title contender (i.e. when Edge won that battle royal a couple months back). The only way not to make MVP into a laughable title contender is to give him proper build.