Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been wanting to make this thread for ages now i hope i explain it right so people understand.
In sport if a so called dominant team for example Man united in the EPL lose there still a good team they just losted a match. So if somebody like John Cena who's like the New York Yankees loses a match to somebody like CM Punk why does it make him look bad? I get momentum but surely they can go for more clean finishers with good matches and make everybody look good in a competitive match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,393 Posts
Wins and losses only really "matter" to me in two different circumstances, which are both the exact opposite:

1: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS wins.

2: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS loses.


Both things suck for the same reason: Predictability. Predictability leads to disinterest which leads to getting bored with the show which leads to complaints and/or changing the channel while said matches are going on.

Point 2 is the worst of the two because this actually does lead wrestlers to being buried. When you always lose, people start to not take you seriously anymore. In those cases, you only get cheered for if you're a comedy relief face. For example, Mahal always loses. Therefore his matches suck even worse than they would if he didn't. They suck anyway, but that's besides the point. John Morrison, interesting wrestler to watch, but his constant loses are causing him to lose the crowd (intentional by WWE, but a stupid move nonetheless. Wasting an over star).

On a more personal note, my opinion that is, I hate when a wrestler always wins because it annoys me. It's the only thing I don't like about Cena. If he was booked more losses and less as Superman, I would have no problem with him. I'm sure other posters here feel the same way.

On the other side of the coin, I hate that Christian is always booked to job. I like the character, and would like to see him be rewarded with more wins so he can be taken more seriously. He deserves to have his character booked as a force, rather than a weasly wrestler who barely squeaks wins out of matches. His second finisher, The Spear, is basically a joke finisher. I think I've seen him pin someone with it once. And it was a wrestler who WWE was currently burying! He always either gets the move countered, or it always fails to get him a win. Likewise, they rarely let him get off the Killswitch. It's countered 2/3rds of the time at least. Though they at least have the courtesy to let him get a win after he hits it.


Those are my main complaints with wins and losses. I like when the outcomes are less predictable. We all remember how pointless it was for Orton and Christian to have so many matches when we all knew Orton was going over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Wins and losses only really "matter" to me in two different circumstances, which are both the exact opposite:

1: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS wins.

2: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS loses.


Both things suck for the same reason: Predictability. Predictability leads to disinterest which leads to getting bored with the show which leads to complaints and/or changing the channel while said matches are going on.

Point 2 is the worst of the two because this actually does lead wrestlers to being buried. When you always lose, people start to not take you seriously anymore. In those cases, you only get cheered for if you're a comedy relief face. For example, Mahal always loses. Therefore his matches suck even worse than they would if he didn't. They suck anyway, but that's besides the point. John Morrison, interesting wrestler to watch, but his constant loses are causing him to lose the crowd (intentional by WWE, but a stupid move nonetheless. Wasting an over star).

On a more personal note, my opinion that is, I hate when a wrestler always wins because it annoys me. It's the only thing I don't like about Cena. If he was booked more losses and less as Superman, I would have no problem with him. I'm sure other posters here feel the same way.

On the other side of the coin, I hate that Christian is always booked to job. I like the character, and would like to see him be rewarded with more wins so he can be taken more seriously. He deserves to have his character booked as a force, rather than a weasly wrestler who barely squeaks wins out of matches. His second finisher, The Spear, is basically a joke finisher. I think I've seen him pin someone with it once. And it was a wrestler who WWE was currently burying! He always either gets the move countered, or it always fails to get him a win. Likewise, they rarely let him get off the Killswitch. It's countered 2/3rds of the time at least. Though they at least have the courtesy to let him get a win after he hits it.


Those are my main complaints with wins and losses. I like when the outcomes are less predictable. We all remember how pointless it was for Orton and Christian to have so many matches when we all knew Orton was going over.
A couple of good points.

nice to see someone respond 86 views with 4 comments over something nobody has brought up before and you get like 50 threads over Cena and How somebody is boring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts
I've been wanting to make this thread for ages now i hope i explain it right so people understand.
In sport if a so called dominant team for example Man united in the EPL lose there still a good team they just losted a match. So if somebody like John Cena who's like the New York Yankees loses a match to somebody like CM Punk why does it make him look bad? I get momentum but surely they can go for more clean finishers with good matches and make everybody look good in a competitive match.
Don't ever ever, put John Cena and New York Yankees in the same category. I am a diehard Yankee's fan this is a damn insult to me. Same thing when Punk said it, it's a damn insult. Yankees actually have talent unlike Cena.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,675 Posts
Wins and losses only really "matter" to me in two different circumstances, which are both the exact opposite:

1: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS wins.

2: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS loses.
This is basically the reason, but the rest of the post was also true.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,176 Posts
Wins and losses only really "matter" to me in two different circumstances, which are both the exact opposite:

1: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS wins.

2: Said wrestler almost ALWAYS loses.


Both things suck for the same reason: Predictability. Predictability leads to disinterest which leads to getting bored with the show which leads to complaints and/or changing the channel while said matches are going on.

Point 2 is the worst of the two because this actually does lead wrestlers to being buried. When you always lose, people start to not take you seriously anymore. In those cases, you only get cheered for if you're a comedy relief face. For example, Mahal always loses. Therefore his matches suck even worse than they would if he didn't. They suck anyway, but that's besides the point. John Morrison, interesting wrestler to watch, but his constant loses are causing him to lose the crowd (intentional by WWE, but a stupid move nonetheless. Wasting an over star).

On a more personal note, my opinion that is, I hate when a wrestler always wins because it annoys me. It's the only thing I don't like about Cena. If he was booked more losses and less as Superman, I would have no problem with him. I'm sure other posters here feel the same way.

On the other side of the coin, I hate that Christian is always booked to job. I like the character, and would like to see him be rewarded with more wins so he can be taken more seriously. He deserves to have his character booked as a force, rather than a weasly wrestler who barely squeaks wins out of matches. His second finisher, The Spear, is basically a joke finisher. I think I've seen him pin someone with it once. And it was a wrestler who WWE was currently burying! He always either gets the move countered, or it always fails to get him a win. Likewise, they rarely let him get off the Killswitch. It's countered 2/3rds of the time at least. Though they at least have the courtesy to let him get a win after he hits it.


Those are my main complaints with wins and losses. I like when the outcomes are less predictable. We all remember how pointless it was for Orton and Christian to have so many matches when we all knew Orton was going over.


Except the fact that you are an Internet smark, so you & your opinion dont matter shit to the WWE.

You can keep crying all day, nothing is going to change unless casuals give a fuck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Except the fact that you are an Internet smark, so you & your opinion dont matter shit to the WWE.

You can keep crying all day, nothing is going to change unless casuals give a fuck.
True. Our opinions don't matter. That's why this forum is pointless. We all should stop posting. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
844 Posts
I kinda depends on the nature of wins and losses. Take Jericho's or Kane's careers as examples. Both of these guys have lost matches to wrestlers "below" them to put them over. However, both of their last WHC title reigns were highly credible (granted, Kane got a bit dull but he was still a belivable champ).

Losses are fine if it helps put people over without damaging the crediblity of the loser. Winning is fine to build momentum, but it shouldn't been over-done, else you end up with the Superman moniker (and not in a good way!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
But people still support there Favorite Sports Team if they lose why can't they support their Fav wrestler if he loses every now and then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,634 Posts
It doesn´t matter if you are greatness, Jericho could lose to a Dead Chicken still get the reaction he gets. Be that as it may, great personalitys are one in 10 in WWE, and ´less elsewhere so wins and loses matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
Wins and losses dont matter singularly, except for title matches of course, but streaks do. For example Morrison hasn't won for a long time, now the crowd don't really care. On the flipside, big winning streaks annoy some of the crowd, just look at Cena and Orton.
 

·
Sheriff of Piltover
Joined
·
2,880 Posts
The only wins/loses that matter are the ones that start/end a story. Recently being CM Punk vs John Cena @ MITB.

The fact that Punk won meant everything. If he were to lose, the momentum of the potentially greatest storyline in years would have died instantly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
In a real non scripted enviroment, wins/losses mean a lot, that moment can stick with a fan/supporter for a lifetime, for example I still rememeber exactly where i was and who i was when Engalnd beat germany 5-1 in football. thats a memory that will stick with me for ever.

Within WWE the wins/losses, they in general dont mean a hell of a lot when looked at by individually, but they do when they are part of a story line, and when WWE want us to beleive they mean something.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top