PDA

View Full Version : Will Edge ever be anything more than a 'placeholder' champion?


Narcissus
12-26-2007, 10:11 PM
It seems all the man ever does is hold the damn thing for a short time until somebody "better" comes along. Think they'll ever give the poor guy the reign he deserves?

And yes, I know he got injured the last time but If he didn't, I still don't see how he would've kept it longer than 3-4 months.

Dorkchop
12-26-2007, 10:16 PM
I think his title run that got cut short because of his torn pec was supposed to be a nice long run.

There's nothing wrong with transitional champs. Hopefully Edge will hold the belt until at least Wrestlemania.

Kane Knight
12-26-2007, 10:21 PM
The reign he deserves is none.

I know the IWC has a chubby for him, but realistically, no. He's gotten more than he deserved.

Narcissus
12-26-2007, 10:25 PM
Naw, he's one of the best in the company right now. He's paid his dues, he is passionate about wrestling, his promos aren't terrible, the way they've developed his 'opportunist' character is pretty brilliant, he takes sick disgusting bumps, and can pull off crazy believable 'high spots' when he needs to. I'm not seeing much of a problem with Edge, KK.

Narcissus
12-26-2007, 10:26 PM
Out of curiosity KK, what is it that you don't like about Edge?

Avenger
12-26-2007, 10:30 PM
Other people like him.

That is the only reason KK doesn't like Edge.

Mister Sinister
12-26-2007, 10:33 PM
KK also thinks Edge only get Cheap Heat, which is true to an extent.

Doesn't stop me from like him however.

Crossrine
12-26-2007, 10:33 PM
Other people like him.

That is the only reason KK doesn't like Edge.

I can think of 2 more reasons :naughty:

Kane Knight
12-26-2007, 11:39 PM
KK also thinks Edge only get Cheap Heat, which is completely true.

Hey, if people are going to take my beliefs and fuck with them...

Well, actually, I don't think he only gets cheap heat. However, he couldn't get a reaction as a face when they tried to main event him, and he got almost no reaction as a heel prior to Matt Hardy getting fired. When you have to get your friend fired for fucking his woman to get heat, you're probably not a solid main eventer.

So people can make up reasons like "you just hate him because everyone likes him," but really, there's a sound argument, and most people don't want to look at it, so they slobber and snarl and growl.

I mean, when even the praise for him has to include shit like "He's paid his dues" and "His promos aren't terrible," sounds like some real recognition of an underlying problem.

But, again, the IWC doesn't like it when people address the elephant in the room. Remember the slobbering fucktards who were screaming at CNN for bringing up steroids? And who were willing to believe WWE's statement that there were no steroids in his system, when the release they gave actually listed a steroid? Yeah.

Noid
12-26-2007, 11:51 PM
KK, I actually don't mind your Edge dislike, because I do believe it is built on proper reasoning. Edge isn't really my cup of tea, either. But Edge was working great as a face from 2001 until his injury in early 2003. His stint on RAW ruined him, but should that really surprise anyone?

Personally, I think Edge's role as Champion should be to get set-up so he can get knocked off as Champion. That's what a heel should be. Not everyone should be put over as an indestructible force. I disagree with when the WWE has ended Edge's WWE Title reigns, but I don't see anything wrong with the philosophy of using Edge as the top heel to get beaten by top faces.

Avenger
12-27-2007, 05:37 AM
Hey, if people are going to take my beliefs and fuck with them...

Well, actually, I don't think he only gets cheap heat. However, he couldn't get a reaction as a face when they tried to main event him, and he got almost no reaction as a heel prior to Matt Hardy getting fired. When you have to get your friend fired for fucking his woman to get heat, you're probably not a solid main eventer.

So people can make up reasons like "you just hate him because everyone likes him," but really, there's a sound argument, and most people don't want to look at it, so they slobber and snarl and growl.

I mean, when even the praise for him has to include shit like "He's paid his dues" and "His promos aren't terrible," sounds like some real recognition of an underlying problem.

But, again, the IWC doesn't like it when people address the elephant in the room. Remember the slobbering fucktards who were screaming at CNN for bringing up steroids? And who were willing to believe WWE's statement that there were no steroids in his system, when the release they gave actually listed a steroid? Yeah.You think about wrestling far too much.

.44 Magdalene
12-27-2007, 07:35 AM
Bizarrely enough, I think there's some sort of agreement between me, Alienoid and KK here.


Edge is... meh. He's alright. He's not main-event-level-impressive, though. I don't know what it is. He just lacks that... flare. Maybe he needs a real gimmick. I don't know. Nothing wrong with the guy, I just can't really lump him in with the Austins and the Undertakers.

Or even the Goldbergs and the Batistas.

He just screams upper midcard to me. He doesn't have that World Champion Sexiness that some guys do, even after he's been champion.

Heyman
12-27-2007, 08:21 AM
A few minor problems I see with Edge

1) Edge has never really had that "big CLEAN win" over a true main-eventer. Edge's two clean wins (if I remember correctly) have been over

a) Kurt Angle (a time period in which Angle himself was a "transition champ/main-eventer.....a fake main-eventer) and...

b) Mick Foley (a time period in which the novelty of defeating Mick Foley was no longer present.....since Foley had done numerous jobs in the past to the likes of Orton, Triple H, etc., etc.).

Guys like Triple H, The Rock, Austin, Orton, Cena, HBK, Batista, Brock Lesnar, etc., etc. ALL had CLEAN victories over LEGIT main-eventers.

Do I think Edge still has a chance to be more than a "placeholder champion?" Yes.

If Edge can defeat Undertaker CLEANLY at Wrestlemania (not only CLEANLY....but in convincing fashion.....similar to how The Rock finished off Austin at Wrestlemania 19), then YES.......I think Edge can be seen as a legit main-eventer.

On top of this, Edge would have to be moved back to RAW (I'm sorry, but no legit main-event star in his prime can ever ascend to greater heights by being on SD). Edge would have to be moved to RAW where he would NOT be fed to Triple H. Edge would then have to dominate RAW.

If all that occurred, then I believe that Edge could be set.

I do not agree with the statement that "Edge's personality is too bland."

Edge is a pretty good heel IMO. He plays the bitter heel to perfection.

Noid
12-27-2007, 08:26 AM
My question to you, though, Heyman, is whether or not it's worth pushing Edge that hard? Is it worth to sacrifice SmackDown!'s comfortability with him, as well as The Undertaker's streak, just to give Edge that nod to credible main event status. The guy isn't exactly a spring chicken, and is really quite riddled with injuries.

Kane Knight
12-27-2007, 09:33 AM
KK, I actually don't mind your Edge dislike, because I do believe it is built on proper reasoning. Edge isn't really my cup of tea, either. But Edge was working great as a face from 2001 until his injury in early 2003. His stint on RAW ruined him, but should that really surprise anyone?

To clarify, it's not even that I dislike Edge. I've said it a dozen times.

However, I think he can't draw a reaction, which I think has been well established. I think he can't draw, which I think has been established (He got great ratings for beating Cena, but everyone wanted to see Cena lose. Anyone could have drawn there...He really hasn't since). I think he's really poor at his whole "ANGRY FACE!" Gimmick, and I think his wrestling has actually gone south. In other words, I don't like his gimmick, and I don't think I deserves to be where he is.

Edge can be awesome. He just hasn't been for a while now.

Kane Knight
12-27-2007, 09:35 AM
My question to you, though, Heyman, is whether or not it's worth pushing Edge that hard? Is it worth to sacrifice SmackDown!'s comfortability with him, as well as The Undertaker's streak, just to give Edge that nod to credible main event status. The guy isn't exactly a spring chicken, and is really quite riddled with injuries.And to be honest, Taker's streak should be broken by someone who is not only newer and relatively healthy, but also someone who's fairly over in their role. Otherwise, we're sacrificing a legacy for a quick, short term solution.

Kane Knight
12-27-2007, 09:37 AM
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW!

Savio
12-27-2007, 02:03 PM
I tought edge beat batista cleanly

Fox
12-27-2007, 11:29 PM
He needs a more legit finish. That Spear just does NOT work for him.

Noid
12-28-2007, 12:32 AM
I honestly don't see what was wrong with his 2002 SmackDown! finishers. The Edgecution and Edgecator were great.

TheCurtainCaller
12-28-2007, 04:27 AM
"On top of this, Edge would have to be moved back to RAW (I'm sorry, but no legit main-event star in his prime can ever ascend to greater heights by being on SD). Edge would have to be moved to RAW where he would NOT be fed to Triple H. Edge would then have to dominate RAW"

I think as wrestling fans, we tend to generalize and overlook the placement of various wrestlers and events which have solidified them as "main eventers" and what draws fans to a champion or to a main eventer.

The statement quoted above from an earlier post is a prime example of sheer stupidity to think that RAW is the only show where anyone can find sucess in the WWE. I seem to remember that RAW hasn't always been the flagship show back in 2004 when the likes of Brock Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero, Big Show, Kurt Angle, and others were on SmackDown and this brand was drawing just as good if not better Neilsen ratings than RAW at the time.

I do seem to remember also during this time a certain unknown named JBL popped up as a main eventer, went on to solidify SmackDown as a prime time show on friday nights, gave great interviews, had great in ring work, and carried the WWE Title for 10 months, the second longest reign of that title in the last 10 years. The title was starting to become a joke until Eddie and him held it during 2004-2005. Guys like Cena make the title a joke.

Another disposition you have to take is several people have stated about dropping the title to taker or another babyface. In professional wrestling, the move is not to have a paper babyface champion if you can. Statitistics, PPV Buyout Ratings, and Cable Ratings have all proven over the years, that a heel champion appeals more to the crowds, draws numbers, and puts butts in the seats because people will pay to try and see the guy they hate get knocked off buy a fan favorite, and what happens when the heel walks out with the title, they tune in to another week of programming or buy another ticket to try and see if the guy gets knocked off again.

Bottom line is that for 2 years, the WWE suffered by having two babyface champions at the same time in Cena and Batista. PPV buyrates and TV Ratings saw their lowest point in years going back to the end of the Monday Night Wars. WWE has positioned themselves in an entertaining position with the crowds right now with two heel champions, with Randy Orton as the WWE Champion and Edge as the World Heavyweight Champion. Both can work in the ring, both can sell and draw heat from the crowd, both can work the mic. PPV Buyrates are up in the last two months, ratings are at steady increase right now. It is working for WWE and I for one do not see them going to another guy at this point for either title. Jericho doesn't appeal to me as champion, and no fan wants to see Edge and Batista go at it for another 6 months this time around.

The lights have gone down and the curtain has dropped!!!

-The Curtain Caller-

Heyman
12-28-2007, 04:33 AM
My question to you, though, Heyman, is whether or not it's worth pushing Edge that hard? Is it worth to sacrifice SmackDown!'s comfortability with him, as well as The Undertaker's streak, just to give Edge that nod to credible main event status. The guy isn't exactly a spring chicken, and is really quite riddled with injuries.


To answer your question Alienoid, NO. IMO - it would NOT be worth pushing Edge that hard.

1) The WWE doesn't seem to have the confidence in Edge to go "all out" with him (possibly due to him being injury prone, or management simply not seeing him as "the" guy). Hence - Edge has never had any CLEAN victories over legit top-tier main-event guys in his career.

2) Backstage politics within the WWE. Even if Edge were to defeat Taker cleanly, I have a hard time believing that it would materialize. I honestly don't know much backstage pull Triple H has, but I can definitely see Edge's "push" being hampered even if he DID defeat Taker cleanly (Triple H related or not).

I was only suggesting that in theory, if the WWE DID want Edge to be more than a 'placeholder' champion, then defeating Taker convincingly (and cleanly) at Mania would be the route to go.

While I'm not the biggest fan of Edge, I do think that Edge plays the bitter heel exceptionally well. Having said that - I do NOT believe he is worthy of defeating Taker at Mania.

The ONLY guy in the WWE that I'd have defeat Taker at Mania (convincingly and cleanly), would be John Cena. Some may not appreciate what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyways.

If it was up to me, I'd have Cena defeat the following wrestlers when he comes back:

-Undertaker
-Dave Batista
-Triple H
-Hulk Hogan
-Steve Austin (Austin comes back for one match)

If possible, I'd also try and get John Cena to face The Rock at Wrestlemania 25.

The crowd can react however they want with Cena. (Whether he's heel or face, Cena does garner TREMENDOUS crowd reactions when he's feuding with top-tier opponents.) For these reading this post, read my underlined sentence 10 more times.

TheCurtainCaller
12-28-2007, 04:40 AM
And just another note, CM Punk is a great in ring talent, needs a little mic work, but in order to solidify himself as a champion and a player in this industry, he needs to break away from the farm team of WWE, which is what ECW has become. I'm sorry but Punk will not nor will he ever be recognized by me as a World Champion until he cleanly wins the WWE Championship on RAW or the World Heavyweight Title on Smackdown. Until he moves to Monday or Friday nights, he will and always will be a Tuesday Night Turn Off. Because ECW is a Joke. How do you defend a world title when your roster consists of 14 actual active wrestlers, 5 of which will probably never hold a World Title. Kevin Thorn, The Boogeyman, Nunzio, and Steven Richards haven't been seen on programming for weeks and Tommy Dreamer and Balls Mahoney are two guys trying to hang on to a dream and a real tradition that defined professional wrestling that closed its doors and died in Philly 7 years ago.

Tommy Dreamer held the ECW Title for all of 5 minutes till he dropped it to Justin Credible, who was a joke of a competitor. Anyone remember when he ran around WWE in the mid 90's with a jock strap on his face. How can you take anyone who worked a gimmick like that seriously as a champion. Balls has never made it past the 3rd match on any card for more than maybe one night and the only reason he made it past the hour mark in a show was because he was probably wrestling the Dudleys. So that leaves 8 guys to actively compete for a "world title" the combinations die out after so many weeks. ECW has become so much of a running joke of itself its not funny. And since when did ECW competitors become "sports entertainers" as Joey Styles calls them each and every week now. Keep stuffing McMahon's wad of cash in your pocket Styles, you no stay mark!!!

Noid
12-28-2007, 06:35 AM
"On top of this, Edge would have to be moved back to RAW (I'm sorry, but no legit main-event star in his prime can ever ascend to greater heights by being on SD). Edge would have to be moved to RAW where he would NOT be fed to Triple H. Edge would then have to dominate RAW"

I think as wrestling fans, we tend to generalize and overlook the placement of various wrestlers and events which have solidified them as "main eventers" and what draws fans to a champion or to a main eventer.

The statement quoted above from an earlier post is a prime example of sheer stupidity to think that RAW is the only show where anyone can find sucess in the WWE. I seem to remember that RAW hasn't always been the flagship show back in 2004 when the likes of Brock Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero, Big Show, Kurt Angle, and others were on SmackDown and this brand was drawing just as good if not better Neilsen ratings than RAW at the time.

I do seem to remember also during this time a certain unknown named JBL popped up as a main eventer, went on to solidify SmackDown as a prime time show on friday nights, gave great interviews, had great in ring work, and carried the WWE Title for 10 months, the second longest reign of that title in the last 10 years. The title was starting to become a joke until Eddie and him held it during 2004-2005. Guys like Cena make the title a joke.

Another disposition you have to take is several people have stated about dropping the title to taker or another babyface. In professional wrestling, the move is not to have a paper babyface champion if you can. Statitistics, PPV Buyout Ratings, and Cable Ratings have all proven over the years, that a heel champion appeals more to the crowds, draws numbers, and puts butts in the seats because people will pay to try and see the guy they hate get knocked off buy a fan favorite, and what happens when the heel walks out with the title, they tune in to another week of programming or buy another ticket to try and see if the guy gets knocked off again.

Bottom line is that for 2 years, the WWE suffered by having two babyface champions at the same time in Cena and Batista. PPV buyrates and TV Ratings saw their lowest point in years going back to the end of the Monday Night Wars. WWE has positioned themselves in an entertaining position with the crowds right now with two heel champions, with Randy Orton as the WWE Champion and Edge as the World Heavyweight Champion. Both can work in the ring, both can sell and draw heat from the crowd, both can work the mic. PPV Buyrates are up in the last two months, ratings are at steady increase right now. It is working for WWE and I for one do not see them going to another guy at this point for either title. Jericho doesn't appeal to me as champion, and no fan wants to see Edge and Batista go at it for another 6 months this time around.

The lights have gone down and the curtain has dropped!!!

-The Curtain Caller-

You're obviously not an idiot, but what a rollercoaster of a post.

I'd like to believe that guys can get over on SmackDown! as well as RAW, but do you know what happens when they do? They get moved over to RAW. Heyman was watching and making great posts during SmackDown!'s great era, but times have changed. Sure, Brock Lesnar, Kurt Angle and Eddie Guerrero made the show worth watching (hell, even Edge made it worth watching in this era), but times have changed now.

You then go on to say that ECW is a joke in your second post. ECW may very well be a joke, but to a certaine extreme, so is current SmackDown!. Whenever they build momentum, they get it stolen away from them. They've been getting it back, yes, but why can't ECW do the same thing? Why is one brand doomed and another one not?

Didn't SmackDown!'s ratings drop with JBL as WWE Champion? In fact, I'd consider him a pretty bad Champion all-round. His matches weren't great, and on the mic, JBL is good, yes, but whilst selling himself as a wrestler he is limited. I mean, a woman can dirty talk up a storm, but if she's talking about what she's going to do to you, and you know that it's not going to be as good as she's making it sound, it doesn't matter how good she is at talking.

Also, you make it sound as if JBL and Eddie Guerrero saved the WWE Title from John Cena. This is not really a possibility, because Cena didn't hold the WWE Championship until after JBL and Eddie Guerrero had their runs with it. Prior to that, it was Brock Lesnar who held the WWE Championship, which takes us back into SmackDown!'s prime era, which you were just fellating before, saying that SmackDown! can be on par with RAW. So how was the WWE Championship ruined before that?

You're right about heels holding the Championship. We have not seen enough of it recently. Edge won the WWE Championship from John Cena, and apparently ratings instantly increased. Fans were interested, but it did not last long enough, because Edge was then jobbed out cleanly to the face. However, going with the heel is not always the right move. Take for example an incident I was just reading about earlier today: Starrcade '97. Sting was the hot challenger to Hollywood Hogan for the WCW Championship, and he had just returned after a year of watching from the rafters. The fans wanted the title change, but Hogan dominating the match as a heel, and getting the clean pin over Sting (even if the commentators did try to save it by implying it was a fast count) was entirely the wrong move to make.

Another more recent example: Triple H's grasp over the World Heavyweight Championship. Boy, did that suck the life out of RAW? That's part of the reason SmackDown! was heralded as so great during Paul Heyman's era. Triple H was just presented with the World Heavyweight Title, and a lot of people wanted to see Rob Van Dam win the belt from Triple H, but it never happened. Shawn Michaels won the title, but lost it 28 days later. Then it was Booker T's chance to challenge, and while I'm sure it was the right move to put Booker T over at WrestleMania XIX, that was not what happened, and Booker T never really recovered as a babyface character.

Yes, there is a lot of interest in a top heel getting chased, but occasionally you need to have him caught. Edge and Randy Orton both need to get their's, and preferbly before their runs start getting too boring (something I would argue has already happened to Orton, who is nowhere near as great as you make him sound).

Orton should not go into WrestleMania with the WWE Championship, and Edge should lose the World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania. The only Championship I see staying put until after Mania, is the ECW Title around CM Punk's waist, which is where it belongs. I see Shelton Benjamin becoming ECW Champion around Backlash time, though.

Noid
12-28-2007, 06:41 AM
To answer your question Alienoid, NO. IMO - it would NOT be worth pushing Edge that hard.

1) The WWE doesn't seem to have the confidence in Edge to go "all out" with him (possibly due to him being injury prone, or management simply not seeing him as "the" guy). Hence - Edge has never had any CLEAN victories over legit top-tier main-event guys in his career.

2) Backstage politics within the WWE. Even if Edge were to defeat Taker cleanly, I have a hard time believing that it would materialize. I honestly don't know much backstage pull Triple H has, but I can definitely see Edge's "push" being hampered even if he DID defeat Taker cleanly (Triple H related or not).

I was only suggesting that in theory, if the WWE DID want Edge to be more than a 'placeholder' champion, then defeating Taker convincingly (and cleanly) at Mania would be the route to go.

While I'm not the biggest fan of Edge, I do think that Edge plays the bitter heel exceptionally well. Having said that - I do NOT believe he is worthy of defeating Taker at Mania.

The ONLY guy in the WWE that I'd have defeat Taker at Mania (convincingly and cleanly), would be John Cena. Some may not appreciate what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyways.

If it was up to me, I'd have Cena defeat the following wrestlers when he comes back:

-Undertaker
-Dave Batista
-Triple H
-Hulk Hogan
-Steve Austin (Austin comes back for one match)

If possible, I'd also try and get John Cena to face The Rock at Wrestlemania 25.

The crowd can react however they want with Cena. (Whether he's heel or face, Cena does garner TREMENDOUS crowd reactions when he's feuding with top-tier opponents.) For these reading this post, read my underlined sentence 10 more times.

I think the best way to build Edge, personally, is to just have him retain the World Heavyweight Championship in ways that aren't clean, per se, but make him look like he's just a smarter wrestler. Edge should have two successful defences at the Royal Rumble and No Way Out, respectively, where he actually doesn't get or need too much help from Zack Ryder and Curt Hawkins. He just outsmarts his opponent, similar to how I assume Ric Flair would have in his glory days.

As for your points about John Cena, personally, I actually agree. To a degree. Looking over the WWE roster, there are not many guys that can believably go over The Undertaker. John Cena is one of them. Personally, a streak vs. streak match against The Undertaker (without a World Title being on the line), could honestly be one of the biggest attractions to a WrestleMania in recent history. If I were Vince, I'd also throw a lot of money at Stone Cold Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan to both do jobs to Cena.

I'm not going to say I flat-out think Cena should end Taker's streak, but the idea is not as bad as it sounds at first hearing it. Especially considering that John Cena would be able to keep The Undertaker's 16 wins alive in his streak (in a matter of speaking), and Cena could then lie down for someone down the line, and give them a great rub as a face.

Heyman
12-28-2007, 08:46 AM
In my opinion, the BIGGEST thing that the WWE has going for them, is how the fans react to John Cena when he faces high profile opponents in big match atmospheres.

Think about it:

-Wrestlemania 22: John Cena vs. Triple H
-ECW One Night Stand 2006: John Cena vs. RVD
-Wrestlemania 23: John Cena vs. Shawn Michaels

Even when John Cena fought Jericho a few times in 2005, Cena was garnering HUGE crowd reactions (and yes - I realize that even though Cena was supposed to be a face, he was getting SPECTACULAR boo's!). This is the part where I will disagree with lots of people:

While most people will be disturbed at how much negativity surrounds Cena in high profile matches (because he's supposed to be a face), I think it's great.....far and away the BEST thing the WWE has going for them right now.

And for this reason, I think the WWE should continue to shove Cena down the fans' throats. Have Cena get into feuds with the likes of Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Austin, Hogan, and The Rock. Now obviously - Cena should job in a few of these matches (to prevent predictability), but ultimately....Cena should ALWAYS win the last match in his respective feuds with them.

I don't know how long it would take Cena to feud with all of the aforementioned men (1 year? 1.5 years?). Assuming that Cena has gone over ALL of these guys, THEN you can have guys from the new era (i.e. Kennedy, MVP, Shelton Benjamin, etc.) feuding against Cena (by that time, these guys might be ready for the main-event level).

The main point I want to make, is that the WWE should milk Cena for all he's worth. Having Cena face crap opponents like Khali and Umaga won't do it. Cena's the WWE's meal ticket. Give him high profile opponents, and let him go over all in the end. The fans can react however they want.

Kane Knight
12-28-2007, 08:55 AM
I honestly don't see what was wrong with his 2002 SmackDown! finishers. The Edgecution and Edgecator were great.Nothing. They were fine finishers,

Fox
12-28-2007, 09:31 AM
In my opinion, the BIGGEST thing that the WWE has going for them, is how the fans react to John Cena when he faces high profile opponents in big match atmospheres.

Think about it:

-Wrestlemania 22: John Cena vs. Triple H
-ECW One Night Stand 2006: John Cena vs. RVD
-Wrestlemania 23: John Cena vs. Shawn Michaels

Even when John Cena fought Jericho a few times in 2005, Cena was garnering HUGE crowd reactions (and yes - I realize that even though Cena was supposed to be a face, he was getting SPECTACULAR boo's!). This is the part where I will disagree with lots of people:

While most people will be disturbed at how much negativity surrounds Cena in high profile matches (because he's supposed to be a face), I think it's great.....far and away the BEST thing the WWE has going for them right now.

And for this reason, I think the WWE should continue to shove Cena down the fans' throats. Have Cena get into feuds with the likes of Undertaker, Batista, Triple H, Austin, Hogan, and The Rock. Now obviously - Cena should job in a few of these matches (to prevent predictability), but ultimately....Cena should ALWAYS win the last match in his respective feuds with them.

I don't know how long it would take Cena to feud with all of the aforementioned men (1 year? 1.5 years?). Assuming that Cena has gone over ALL of these guys, THEN you can have guys from the new era (i.e. Kennedy, MVP, Shelton Benjamin, etc.) feuding against Cena (by that time, these guys might be ready for the main-event level).

The main point I want to make, is that the WWE should milk Cena for all he's worth. Having Cena face crap opponents like Khali and Umaga won't do it. Cena's the WWE's meal ticket. Give him high profile opponents, and let him go over all in the end. The fans can react however they want.

But isn't this kind of a lazy mindset? "Let's keep shoving Cena down the fans' throats because they boo the shit out of him when he's in main events, but at least they're reacting somehow"?

What about his boring, uninteresting promos filled with lame jokes? What about his lack of a good work rate and the predictability of his matches, pretty much from start to end?

And I don't think it was just the "big match" atmosphere that got people so into his matches with Triple H, RVD and HBK. I think it was the fact that everyone wanted to see him drop the belt; they wanted to see him lose. Sure he's drawing some kind of reaction from the fans because they're booing him constantly, but it's the wrong kind of heat for your #1 babyface.

Guys like Stone Cold, The Rock, Mick Foley and, at a time, Chris Jericho, never had this problem. They cut interesting and entertaining promos, their feuds were something of note, and the matches still had "big match" atmospheres around them because they were so over.

I think the question is, should WWE keep pushing Cena because he IS their only reaction-drawer, or should WWE focus on pushing other superstars (i.e. CM Punk) who seem to be getting natural face pops, AS FACES. I think the answer is clear, but the WWE has dug such a deep, dark hole with John Cena as their posterboy, it's really going to be a strugggle to get out.