Quote:
Originally Posted by .44 Magdalene
You know, winning an argument usually entails convincing somebody somewhere of something.
All I'm sayin'
|
1) The WWE would have been better off by having MVP win Money In The Bank as opposed to CM Punk. This way, a new mid-carder would have been elevated, and would have had some kind of notch under his belt. CM Punk should have been built up far better this past year, and should have been fighting with Edge for one of the world titles.
2) Jeff Hardy being pushed correctly would have been beneficial for the company...regardless of his two strikes. The rewards clearly outweighed the risks in this case for the company.
3) A non-clean victory does not hold much significance amongst the fans, whereas a clean win does.
4) There should be ONE clear #1 guy in the company, and this should be solidified at Wrestlemania. Austin became that guy at Wrestlemania 14. Shawn Michaels became that guy at Wrestlemania 12. And so forth....
5) The glass ceiling is a very real problem in the WWE. The ultimate goal for the WWE should be to create a limited glass ceiling that allows for promising mid-carders to rise within the ranks and become LONG-TERM non-transitional main-eventers. This environment, at the current time, and for many years now, has not existed. Therefore - I believe that all of Matt's victories over CM Punk, Jeff Hardy, etc. will have been in vain if he ultimately gets spanked by the likes of Triple H and John Cena...or numerous occassions. It will ultimately mean nothing. Chavo Guerrero putting Rey Mysterio out of action also ultimately served no purpose. The ends justifies the means.
Those were some of the arguments that I presented...and felt that I was victorious on....by a large margin.
I leave up to you to decide whether you agree with those or not.
In my opinion however, your wrestling knowledge and intuition is not up to par if you do not see things in that light.