Wrestling Forum banner

Is it time for Cena to put people over cleanly??

9K views 91 replies 71 participants last post by  jaymo123 
#1 ·
I've counted a whopping 4 people that have beaten Cena clean since 2005

HBK on Raw
HHH on Raw and NOC
Batista at Summerslam
Rock at Wrestlemania
Cena and Taker have wrestled once or twice, Cena was about to lose each time until interference

I think it's time for Cena to pay his dues and put people over CLEANLY. Not BS like Punk at MITB

I'm thinking the most likely candidate to go over Cena clean is Ryback since he was about to pin Cena at SS before the Shield came in

Maybe Ambrose once the Shield craze is over.
 
#58 ·
God almighty, some of the stupidity in this thread is just mind boggling. Pull up a chair kids, time for a lesson.

Let's start with clean loss, which is something a lot of people are getting confused about. A clean loss means a wrestler loses in a fashion that is devoid of interference, outside circumstances, distraction, anything. Its just a simple no nonsense pin in the middle of the ring. Goldberg beating Hogan? NOT clean. Curt Henning came down to ringside, followed closely by Karl Malone and DDP. Malone gave Henning a Diamond Cutter while Page taunted Hogan. Hogan, who had just hit Goldberg with a leg drop, was distracted and was pointing and shouting at Page, drawing attention away from his opponent, who when recovered, hit Hogan with a Spear and Jackhammer to win. Nothing about that was clean.

Second, we move on to everyone's favorite golden boy. Cena has, in his time, put over SOME opposition cleanly. HBK, Trips, Batista, etc. However, what Cena is absolutely terrible at is SELLING the loss. That is a big thing people in this thread don't seem to get. You can lose in an unclean fashion and still put your opponent over huge (which is what happened with Edge, for example, or Punk). The babyface absolutely has to make it seem to the viewers, in attendance and at home, that their loss means something, and at the same time that the heel's win means something. The heel won and the babyface lost, so both parties must do their part to sell, to the audience, the ramifications of what the outcome means. For the heel, a win over the babyface, clean or not, means that they got the better of the babyface and that the villain is in a position of strength, and the babyface must sell that the loss shows them in a position of weakness. This is absolutely CRUCIAL. It puts the situation in danger of becoming won out by the side of evil, and therefore gives good a reason to overcome it. Overcoming the obstacle is what provides us with adversity, from adversity we derive drama, and thus entertainment.

Cena's problem, with almost all of his feuds as of late, is that he doesn't sell the loss. The villain beats Cena, then Cena, typical to his character, goes out and says "ah well, better luck next time for me. So what if I lost, I owned up to it. I rise above hate, and I know in my heart that I'm the best in this industry." Now the victory the heel gained means nothing. Why? Because the babyface he beat has flat out stated that the win meant nothing, the loss meant nothing and there's no reason for any sort of feud to continue. THAT is a problem. Effectively, Cena is stealing the heat from his opponent and giving it back to himself. When the heel has no heat, where's the interest in seeing them get beaten? They're just another guy. Its like you have to start all over again. Where's the build up of the heel as a legitimate threat or contender who the fans are supposed to take seriously? There isn't any once Cena gets on the mic.

He constantly does this. Nexus, Punk, Brock, now Ziggler, all of them. Either he wins and celebrates it as a big deal, or he loses, and sluffs it off like it wasn't a big deal. This is a big problem with the Cena character. He's designed to rise above hate, in other words, to not make it seem like losing gets to him. Its the character's way of being a good role model to children-you know, don't let opposition get you down, fight to achieve your goals, etc. Unfortunately, while it might be a good message to kids, it makes the character so incredibly boring. His saying that a crushing loss won't affect him actually becomes a virus that ends up fucking over the guys he WORKS with as well. Its not just that the Cena character is dying, it actually kills the guys he goes up against as well.

Remember Punk in the summer? "Hey Cena, why should you get a title shot, I've beaten you 3 times. I've always come out on top against you." Alright, Punk is trying to build up his heel character by showing that the babyface has constantly lost to him. He's establishing that the babyface has a real obstacle to overcome, which would be actually beating him. Then Cena gets on the mic. "Punk your whole 300 day reign has been irrelevant, I don't care if you give me another title shot, I'll just get one later anyway." Wow. Punk has beaten Cena 3 times, including once as a heel, so Cena counters that Punk's reign has made the title worthless and Cena doesn't care that Punk has beaten him. Way to make the heel seem credible. I really want to see him get beaten now that you've told me his title means nothing and that even though you've lost to him 3 times, that means nothing as well. In fact, he even says that he'll end up with another title shot later anyway, which means that regardless of the outcome of the match, Cena will ultimately come out on top. So Punk now has a worthless title, worthless wins over the top guy in the company and Cena will get what he wants eventually anyhow. All of these things meant something, until Cena said they didn't. He failed to play up the importance, and he's the top guy. If he thinks they're important, then his fans and the audience will think they're important as well. He doesn't, so that kills it. Why would you want to see a Punk/Cena match, as a casual fan, when Cena has already said that he doesn't care that he wins or loses, and says that his losses to this guy from before didn't mean anything? That means that if he loses now, it won't mean anything, in which case why the fuck are they wrestling?

For the audience to be interested in a feud, they have to see the heel look like they're are in an advantageous position that the babyface needs to overcome. Part of the heel's advantageous position is the babyface acting like they're a real threat. When the babyface doesn't, the heel is no longer in an advantageous position and the interest in the match just dies. All because the babyface didn't act like the threat was credible or legitimate. And its in this area that Cena is a grievous offender. Forget putting people over cleanly, he needs to fucking act like what he's involved in has a point.



TL;DR version-Cena loses enough, he needs to stop no selling his losses.
 
#72 ·
God almighty, some of the stupidity in this thread is just mind boggling. Pull up a chair kids, time for a lesson.

Let's start with clean loss, which is something a lot of people are getting confused about. A clean loss means a wrestler loses in a fashion that is devoid of interference, outside circumstances, distraction, anything. Its just a simple no nonsense pin in the middle of the ring. Goldberg beating Hogan? NOT clean. Curt Henning came down to ringside, followed closely by Karl Malone and DDP. Malone gave Henning a Diamond Cutter while Page taunted Hogan. Hogan, who had just hit Goldberg with a leg drop, was distracted and was pointing and shouting at Page, drawing attention away from his opponent, who when recovered, hit Hogan with a Spear and Jackhammer to win. Nothing about that was clean.

Second, we move on to everyone's favorite golden boy. Cena has, in his time, put over SOME opposition cleanly. HBK, Trips, Batista, etc. However, what Cena is absolutely terrible at is SELLING the loss. That is a big thing people in this thread don't seem to get. You can lose in an unclean fashion and still put your opponent over huge (which is what happened with Edge, for example, or Punk). The babyface absolutely has to make it seem to the viewers, in attendance and at home, that their loss means something, and at the same time that the heel's win means something. The heel won and the babyface lost, so both parties must do their part to sell, to the audience, the ramifications of what the outcome means. For the heel, a win over the babyface, clean or not, means that they got the better of the babyface and that the villain is in a position of strength, and the babyface must sell that the loss shows them in a position of weakness. This is absolutely CRUCIAL. It puts the situation in danger of becoming won out by the side of evil, and therefore gives good a reason to overcome it. Overcoming the obstacle is what provides us with adversity, from adversity we derive drama, and thus entertainment.

Cena's problem, with almost all of his feuds as of late, is that he doesn't sell the loss. The villain beats Cena, then Cena, typical to his character, goes out and says "ah well, better luck next time for me. So what if I lost, I owned up to it. I rise above hate, and I know in my heart that I'm the best in this industry." Now the victory the heel gained means nothing. Why? Because the babyface he beat has flat out stated that the win meant nothing, the loss meant nothing and there's no reason for any sort of feud to continue. THAT is a problem. Effectively, Cena is stealing the heat from his opponent and giving it back to himself. When the heel has no heat, where's the interest in seeing them get beaten? They're just another guy. Its like you have to start all over again. Where's the build up of the heel as a legitimate threat or contender who the fans are supposed to take seriously? There isn't any once Cena gets on the mic.

He constantly does this. Nexus, Punk, Brock, now Ziggler, all of them. Either he wins and celebrates it as a big deal, or he loses, and sluffs it off like it wasn't a big deal. This is a big problem with the Cena character. He's designed to rise above hate, in other words, to not make it seem like losing gets to him. Its the character's way of being a good role model to children-you know, don't let opposition get you down, fight to achieve your goals, etc. Unfortunately, while it might be a good message to kids, it makes the character so incredibly boring. His saying that a crushing loss won't affect him actually becomes a virus that ends up fucking over the guys he WORKS with as well. Its not just that the Cena character is dying, it actually kills the guys he goes up against as well.

Remember Punk in the summer? "Hey Cena, why should you get a title shot, I've beaten you 3 times. I've always come out on top against you." Alright, Punk is trying to build up his heel character by showing that the babyface has constantly lost to him. He's establishing that the babyface has a real obstacle to overcome, which would be actually beating him. Then Cena gets on the mic. "Punk your whole 300 day reign has been irrelevant, I don't care if you give me another title shot, I'll just get one later anyway." Wow. Punk has beaten Cena 3 times, including once as a heel, so Cena counters that Punk's reign has made the title worthless and Cena doesn't care that Punk has beaten him. Way to make the heel seem credible. I really want to see him get beaten now that you've told me his title means nothing and that even though you've lost to him 3 times, that means nothing as well. In fact, he even says that he'll end up with another title shot later anyway, which means that regardless of the outcome of the match, Cena will ultimately come out on top. So Punk now has a worthless title, worthless wins over the top guy in the company and Cena will get what he wants eventually anyhow. All of these things meant something, until Cena said they didn't. He failed to play up the importance, and he's the top guy. If he thinks they're important, then his fans and the audience will think they're important as well. He doesn't, so that kills it. Why would you want to see a Punk/Cena match, as a casual fan, when Cena has already said that he doesn't care that he wins or loses, and says that his losses to this guy from before didn't mean anything? That means that if he loses now, it won't mean anything, in which case why the fuck are they wrestling?

For the audience to be interested in a feud, they have to see the heel look like they're are in an advantageous position that the babyface needs to overcome. Part of the heel's advantageous position is the babyface acting like they're a real threat. When the babyface doesn't, the heel is no longer in an advantageous position and the interest in the match just dies. All because the babyface didn't act like the threat was credible or legitimate. And its in this area that Cena is a grievous offender. Forget putting people over cleanly, he needs to fucking act like what he's involved in has a point.



TL;DR version-Cena loses enough, he needs to stop no selling his losses.

For all the people that are defending Cena, THIS is the problem we have with Cena and is exactly what we're talking about with the need for him to put people over. Nobody is asking Cena to job to Sandow, Rhodes, Cesaro, Santino, Clay, or any other mid-carder because that'd be stupid. What we're asking him to do is make his opponents out to be credible threats. That gets them over better than any 3 count on Cena himself. When Cena laughs off his opponent, it kills their credibility even if they happen to beat him the night before.

Look at the ladder match between the Undertaker and Jeff Hardy for the Undisputed title back in 2002. Sure, Undertaker won and nobody really thought Hardy was seriously going to win, but with 'Taker shaking his head in disbelief at the fight Hardy gave him and raising Hardy's arm up at the end, *that* put Hardy over big time because 'Taker essentially told the audience that Hardy brought it to him and should be taken seriously.

Cena does NOTHING of sorts. He doesn't sell his losses which makes them worthless, he doesn't sell his opponent's promos which makes them hollow threats. Cena basically doesn't sell and that's the problem. How much of a rub do you think Ziggler would've gotten after WWE TLC had Cena came out the next night on Raw fuming that AJ turned her back on him and that it's payback time? But no, it's just dirt off his shoulder.
 
#7 ·
Cena is the biggest star in the WWE. The face of the WWE.
He doesn't need to put people over 'cleanly', in order to put them over. Feuding with Cena should be more than enough to get over, just look at where guys like Punk, and Ziggler are now.
If you aren't able to get YOURSELF over during a feud with the TOP dog (considering it isn't a filler/squash feud), then something is wrong, and being put over 'cleanly' sure as hell ain't going to benefit you much.

The TOP guy losing cleanly should ONLY happen on special occasions. Otherwise it devalues your TOP guy when he loses cleanly often. It makes no sense, but i'm sure most 'smarks' are unable to comprehend the reasoning behind what makes someone the 'top guy'.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Cena is the biggest star in the WWE. The face of the WWE.
He doesn't need to put people over 'cleanly', in order to put them over. Feuding with Cena should be more than enough to get over, just look at where guys like Punk, and Ziggler are now.
If you aren't able to get YOURSELF over during a feud with the TOP dog (considering it isn't a filler/squash feud), then something is wrong, and being put over 'cleanly' sure as hell ain't going to benefit you much.

The TOP guy losing cleanly should ONLY happen on special occasions. Otherwise it devalues your TOP guy when he loses cleanly often. It makes no sense, but i'm sure most 'smarks' are unable to comprehend the reasoning behind what makes someone the 'top guy'.
Is that right? The guy that no sells promos and losses like it isn't shit? LOL. Cena BURIED Wade Barrett at the end of 2010. There was no reason for it. It didn't even sense. He just did it. And let's not forget him turning heel on Rey Mysterio for that one night...Mysterio won the vacant WWE title after working a real match and what happens? Cena gets a free title shot out of the blue during the second hour and beats Mysterio pretty easily.

Had he been the only top star, Rock would not put as many people over.
No. Rock has talked about this. He could of done the Austin thing and won all the time and never lost on television but he thought that was Superman booking and perceived it as boring. He wanted to be vulnerable and have obstacles as a face. You know why? Because you get pops like the one at Backlash 2000 when he won the title and there hasn't been a title win since that has touched it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TromaDogg
#81 ·
Cena's matches aren't even worth watching. I knew he was going to win tonight even when Big E interfered, there is no suspension of disbelief because he just never loses. I bet you could count on one hand the number of times Cena has lost on Raw in the last 4 years.
 
#83 ·
This. It's one thing that someone like The Rock perfected back in '99-'01. Yes, he didn't lose cleanly much either but he had a sense of vulnerability. There was always a sense that he may lose due to underhanded heel tactics or outside interference. You don't get that sense of vulnerability with Cena.
 
#46 ·
OP mentioned HHH and Batista. I'll give you Show and Khali.

Don't think you can call JBL's win clean. Yeah, it was a No DQ match but trying to set somebody on fire and getting lucky by pushing them onto a car screen isn't clean. Orton didn't pin him cleanly at HIAC either; tag match wins involving Nexus involved distraction from another wrestler.
 
#4 ·
its time they use his star power to create new top level talent, cena should job to ziggler, ryback, the shield etc. Obviously he needs to keep winning but in big time matches hes gotta let the young stars get there big win. Cenas popularity and drawing power is dropping and he can help set the wwe up for future years by putting over the younger guys.
 
#12 ·
its time they use his star power to create new top level talent, cena should job to ziggler, ryback, the shield etc. Obviously he needs to keep winning but in big time matches hes gotta let the young stars get there big win. Cenas popularity and drawing power is dropping and he can help set the wwe up for future years by putting over the younger guys.
i agree on this part
 
#6 ·
Cannot make new stars, if old (red) giant stars are sucking all the mass and energy from new smaller stars. Stellar nurseries are created from the death of old stars in dust clouds...

I love astronomy - so much symbolism to life. And entertainment.
 
#8 ·
I think people overrate 'clean' wins. It doesn't have to be clean to matter. Just ask Punk, his career did a 180 since MITB over a year ago. And the top star isn't gonna start jobbing to all sorts of people, get real. Hogan barely ever put anyone over clean and same goes for Austin. Rock only could afford to cuz Austin was there as well. Had he been the only top star, Rock would not put as many people over. Top stars don't lose clean hardly at all, and that's never gonna change.
 
#9 ·
I think he needs to put one face and one heel over cleanly. Whoever they have planned for both slots. If he lusts everyone over cleAnly, then he looks like a joke for future big money matches.
 
#14 ·
The thing about those guys you listed is they are all iconic or legends in the WWE/wrestling as a whole.

Why would Cena put over anyone beneath him with no potential in clean fashion? Sorry, not happening. Vince is a billionaire and has more brains than some IWC member.

Batista may not be a legend but he was the number two face or number one heel at that time. I remember that Wrestlemania he and Cena won he was considered bigger than Cena as he headlined. I know times have changed but Cena got his revenge and won that feud.

As for the other ones, yeah they are legends. Cena doesn't put over a scrub. And did The Rock not beat him "clean"?
 
#16 ·
Not going to happen. Cena would only lose clean if any 1 of the 2 things happen:

1. Cena turns heel.

2. Vince makes someone else the face of the WWE.


And by the looks of how things are going, I dont think any of the 2 things are going to happen anytime soon. Cena wont/cant lose clean to young guys, if he does his superhero superman like character will lose its meaning.
 
#17 ·
it might happen if he faces ryback one on one.face vs face similar to hogan vs warrior
 
#20 ·
Doesn't need to be clean as long as its done well, Punk at MITB isn't considered 'clean' but was definitely a 'making of a star' victory. The Ziggler Ladder match was a poor attempt IMO though, poorly setup feud and the outcome was more about AJ and Cena than Dolph at all.

I think he's being used OK at the minute but being in some ridiculously bad feuds since May, I think they'll probably let some of this 'New Generation 2.0' get over like the Ryback's to the point where they could utilize Cena to help create the ones that may be faltering to make it.
 
#39 ·
Besides Shawn Michaels.........

Sent from my MB612 using VerticalSports.Com App
 
#27 ·
Next after The Rock is Taker.

I mean fuck new talent and all of that :punk2
 
#31 ·
He only loses to already established stars.. like he did with The Rock at WM.
Cena needs to lose cleanly in order to make big stars.. for a new talent to say he pinned Cena cleanly would do a lot of good.

Cena just hates jobbing. You all seen it at WM27 when he had to lose to Miz. That was the worst main event wrestlemaina I've ever seen.
 
#32 · (Edited)
Yeah it was cause u can't expect a good match between the likes of Miz and Cena. I don't blame Cena for not wanting Miz to end WM as the winner.

Also yeah, he losses to established stars, who else would he lose too? They can make him lose clean to a new star but only if they are certain he will get a big push. For example Rock lost clean in Goldberg's WWE debut, but that was because it was certain Goldberg would become a mega-star. Otherwise giving away clean losses like that with your top face is stupid. Maybe now that they are certain Ryback will be a big dominant face in the next few years, they can have him beat Cena clean, and it will be big. But other than that no, and when you want heels to beat the top face clean :fpalm
 
#34 ·
losing cleanly? not necessarily, you can put people over without losing cleanly.

Him and the booking team need to stop crushing the momentum of guys like Ziggler tho, Ziggler picks up the win at TLC which could have been a huge thing, a win over John Cena, clean or not he won and they could have played on that, instead of that he got absolutely crushed cashing in the next night, he got shit dropped on him after having a totally unneccesary shoot belittling him by Cena, any momemtum dolph has from TLC is all but gone, and it wouldnt have needed Cena to lose clean to keep up the guys momentum. the only person who Cena has made look decent since TLC is his workout buddy ryblack.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top