Not really mainly due to how terrible the WWE has booked/handled her since the call-up. She does have a weakness with promos which NXT was able to deal with successfully and Creative has failed miserably.

Overall?

Bayley just isn't that good

I tend to gloss over posts by someone whose initial response was "No"

Just because I didn't see anything that convinced me otherwise doesn't mean I am an idiot. Board is getting to the stage where it's impossible to have a different opinion or debate. Get risked being called "an idiot" by some aggressive twat ;)

Only joking of course!

But seriously, your second post compared him to Hogan, Austin etc... And my whole argument is based on the fact that he isn't on that level and the company has suffered for it.

Same reason why feeding a bunch of guys to someone who isn't a megastar and doesn't pull massive numbers, might not be a great idea.

Hogan doing politics and a Cena doing politics are very different things. He shouldn't have the same pull as a Hogan or an Austin, is my point.

Other posts have been good and made some good points worth considering in the discussion. I just think that even with the good that he does, even in an era of bad booking, he could still be harming the product potentially.

Only potentially, but think it was worth discussing and it's on a second page, so it obviously has been.

When calling someone an idiot, you should probably spell "you're" right. Just a heads up.

Haha

Oh snap!

I think the question "What stars has John Cena helped make in the past 12 years" is a very interesting question. Who has he "made"?

He "helped" Edge, CM Punk, and Daniel Bryan...... dunno if I would go so far as to say he "made" them.

Aj Styles? Prob Styles' best feud by far and he's put him over multiple times

All Cena can really do is put on great matches and agree to put guys over. And he's done that way more than he probably should. Past that, it's up to WWE to not drop the ball.

Accurate^^^

Yes, extremely.

Yeah, she's been booked so poorly, what with getting to successfully defend the RAW Women's Championship @ WrestleMania 33. Stop with this.

Good God...

#ABTWasRight

:rofl:

This is true, but I don't know if the argument being forward is "John Cena is entirely to blame" or whether or not it's "the effect of John Cena's push" is to blame. We're down to semantics on that front, but I don't think you'd disagree that the Cenazoic Period is less fruitful than others headed by a "mega-star."

I mean, that itself seems like too obvious a point to make, but I do find it interesting that his current greatness (and the WWE, frankly, needing him), kind of retroactively paints over the years and years and years that it really wasn't working the way things like that are supposed to work.

These boards are often not the place for logic and reason. You get that everywhere, but some other places just have more members, so by sheer shock and awe you can find better conversation just based on the odds. But posters like Destor, #1-wwf-fan, Gertner and BigCrippyZ are wonderful.

But then there are times where you just have to go the "you're an idiot" route.

Like when DAMN iNATOR uses an "lol so dumb" sarcastic tone while trying to argue that Bayley's face run has been "extremely successful" and well booked.

I think Dave Meltzer said it best when he said Bayley is more gullible than Surfer Sting.

About what? Nothing ever?

ONLY things I'd have done differently are have her retain in her hometown v. Alexa and write her babyface promos that still allow her charisma to shine through without all the repetitive "I'm just so happy to be here, yay! Unicorns and sunshine and rainbows!" lines.

Why would you do anything differently? Her run has been extremely successful, right?

Why mess with something that's going so amazingly well? You might fuck it up and she'd start getting booed or something.

Aren't almost all her promos along the lines of that stuff?

She won the title so obviously its been super successful. She has had the belt what more do you want

Cena has lost more than any franchise player the WWE has ever had. Bruno never lost. Backlund went from 1977 until his loss to Diesel in 95 without losing a single MATCH at MSG. Think about that. Hogan is Hogan. Nothing to add. Stone Cold wasn't putting people over left and right. The Rock did his share of losing but not to Cena's level. Cena is just a wrestler. He can't control his opponents mic skills, in ring skills, charisma, and what direction the writing staff goes. He works hard and more often than not has amazing matches. Everything else is out of his hands.

Agreed with big stinky Gertner. To blame Cena is ludicrous. IMO part of the success of the Hogan era was not only did u have Hulk on top but u had every territory's main event in your mid card in meaningful angles. Now nobody is a star.

The Austin and Rock era benefited from being insanely competitive and having to outdo the comp. Even with a midcard with crap workers, the main event scene was hotter than almost ever.

Then there was some flipflopping til Cena took the reigns and fans have already seen that kind of franchise vanilla babyface, and they haveny done enougj creatively with anything from mid card to main event to make people give a shit.

Bob Backlund lost one match from 1977 to 1984. Bruno would get pinned in tag matches while Champ, but Backlund didn't even do that.

1 loss and it wasn't even a pinfall or submission (His manager Arnold Skaaland threw in the towel against Iron Shiek in December of 1983)

Bayley is just terrible on the mic. She doesn't connect with her fans.

Lol remember how much they played this up going in ss 94 and wm 11?

I wasn't really watching a lot of wrestling from like 94-95. Just the major ppv's. I've watched a lot of stuff from that era since then, but completely out of order.

All those guys outside of Rock and Cena barely jobbed and what do you know... they were all massively over as babyfaces for years. Cena jobbed left and right and the crowd turned on him. Rock jobbed left and right... and the crowd turned on him. It's almost as if you can be the most charismatic guy of all time but if you're booked as a loser, the crowd doesn't get behind you. HMMMMMM.

Those are great posts by Gertner and Dale, and I think the focus really is on the booking. Whilst going further back, it is hard to compare today's product to the 80's where it was easier to protect top guys and have them safely defend titles against lesser opposition in front of different audiences with no internet coverage.

I think we can all agree that the era, the quantity of matches, the internet coverage and the sub-par booking are all massive contributers, more so than one guy and his limited input. However older guys benefitted, it still stands to reason that they were all more popular than John Cena in terms of numbers of people who came to see them consistently. Although I admit it is hard to measure, especially when it is hard to guage who people are paying to see exactly, like Dale said.

There is still room, however, for him to have done his own damage and made significant contributions to keeping certain people down. It might not have mattered much because of the inept nature of the booking anyhow.

But for my money, he hasn't really successfully elevated anyone through a series of matches (just look at what Jericho did for Owens when he was back. The best performers get it done no matter what) and there are too many rumours and stories about his pull backstage to completely write off the possibility that he has damaged or halted quite a few guys progress.

Not the main contributer by a long shot, I agree, not even close. But all good and top rate No.1 guy, he has never been.

Do you genuinely believe that people turned on Cena because he jobbed a few times? Or Rock for that matter?

Yeah the jobbing has little to do with it. Just uninteresting booking

The jobbing has a shitload to do with it. lol

Do you think they turned on The Rock because he was awful?

When a guy cuts promos where he's talking shit and acting like a badass and then loses constantly, his character comes off like an unlikable, phony dipshit.

If Bruno, Backlund, Hogan or Austin were getting beaten constantly they wouldn't have been nearly as big of a deal. Not even close.

Throw Goldberg on that list, too. He didn't even really have anything else going for him. He became a huge star pretty much EXCLUSIVELY because he came off as a bad ass and backed it up by not jobbing on a monthly basis.

Look at Ryback's original face run as a microcosm of it all. He murders everyone he faces, starts a program with Punk and the crowd goes NUTS as soon as he gets his hands on him. He gets massively over... and they start having him job a lot and it all goes away.

Turned on rocky cuz the face act was getting a tiuch stale and they knew he was leaving to do movies

His face act was the exact same as his heel act. He was just... The Rock. Talking shit.

Problem is when he's a face and he talks shit and then fails to back it up he looks like a dumbass.