Lacing SCOTT STEINER's boots
Join Date: Sep 2011
Re: Kofi Kingston Sucks
OP, one of the main points people are using, you're blowing over like it doesn't mean anything when it does.
That being: There are many worse wrestlers on the roster (some far worse) for you to be focusing your aggression so much on Kofi Kingston of all people.
Speaking of focusing your aggression in the wrong place, that's your main problem, but because you're blaming the wrestlers rather than the shit ass creative team and WWE higher ups, but I'll get to that later.
What I'm getting at is this: Kofi Kingston, at absolute worst, is not in the bottom 20% of the roster. I do not think you can logicaly argue that he is. Kofi is also not in the bottom 33%, you have to be a huge hater and pick out the tiniest flaws (which not explaining why that many guys are better) to put him in that category. I'd also argue that he's easily in the top 50%. Perhaps that isn't saying much, but at least he doesn't come out and seem like a fuckin cardboard cutout like most of the stiffs out there.
I would argue he's in the top 33-40% right now, but I would understand if you disagreed. I think it's safe to say we can agree he's at worst in the upper 50%.
Which means half the roster is worse. And I'm including the total package. . .look, charisma, athleticism, strength, getting the crowd to care, being exciting, ring work (you can seperate it into offense and defense if you want for two categories), mic skills, etc. There are definitely plenty of guys who do more moves, but most of them are generic stiffs with a generic moveset, generic look, generic voice, and generic personality. . .not to mention a generic gimmick.
So yes, when you attack Kofi, people get defensive. Why? Not because we love Kofi, but because you want to "make an example of" a guy who isn't anywhere near the bottom of the pile. That is specifically why people have gotten defensive about your Kofi comments, so yes, it's quite relevant and on point to say it.
Anyway, like I touched on earlier, your aggression is focused in the wrong place. Kofi has potential. If used properly, he could be big. He isn't the best in the ring, he doesn't get mic time (he talks just fine btw, I disagree about your opinion there).
You expect Kofi to "work hard and do tons of shit". . .when exactly? How exactly? Do more spots? How'd that work out for John Morrison? He got jobbed out, hated on by IWC, labeled a "spot monkey", then got fired. Fired solely because he had the audasity to complain about his gf not getting her match and because he didn't hug the chick that replaced her. That's how garbage stuff works there. WWE will sooner throw someone away who's valuble and useable just to spite someone than to work with them. But it's the wrestler's fault. . .right?
Again, how'd that work out for Morrison? Busted his ass to put on exciting matches. . .got fired anyway after a multi-month long burial which included several squash matches.
Blame whoever's in charge of that stuff for underutilizing talent. If you own a company and tell your workers to do their job at a certain speed, and to go to certain areas at certain times of the day, you can't blame the workers for not doing more than they're told to do without being asked to do it. Especially when there's been an established history of going unnoticed and being underused despite it.
Your blame is in the wrong place OP. Also, firing Kofi does not improve the product in any way.