Make matches matter

[Mr. C]

Originally Posted by Fox I guarantee they will pull the trigger one day. Cena can't be this character forever. It's just a matter of time. My only concern is that when they do pull the trigger, will it be too late?

You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Punk and Rock have both accomplished this. They don't even need to turn him heel necessarily. He can say whatever he wants within the limits, and it's worked; he's stood toe to toe with Rock. One of the things about Cena that annoys me is when he acts happy/sarcastic when a situation demands seriouness. It doesn't come across so much as cocky as that he doesn't care, and if he doesn't care, why should the audience?

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan Cena vs Punk would kill the progress they've made getting the fans more behind Cena. Not only because it would put him back in the title picture so they can start resenting him again but it would put him against a guy that they will be WAY more behind than him. It would be a bad idea.

I am actually really pumped for the idea of CM Punk vs. John Cena again. I always thought it should have been the main event the WWE should put forward since Extreme Rules, and I still stand by that assertion.

John Cena should win Money in the Bank at the PPV, and then CM Punk and he start their tension. Punk tells Cena that he's going to cash in just like everyone else. Cena says "I'm not like you -- I've got hustle, loyalty and respect" and all that jazz. On the 1000th edition of RAW, Punk and Bryan have a Submission Match or something like that, and in a rage, some heels attack Punk (perhaps a freshly turned Zack Ryder with Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks... more on that in a second) and Cena runs out for the save. Cena then nails Punk with his briefcase and cashes in, becoming the 11-time WWE Champion.

This really sets the build for Cena vs. Punk at SummerSlam into motion. Punk would actually have a moral case against Cena, who has not turned heel, but has shown himself to be human and capable of going against what he preaches sometimes. Punk would then beat Cena at SummerSlam, and the win would make Punk look amazing. You can even have Cena hand Punk the WWE Title back as a symbolic "passing of the torch." Not that Cena is going anywhere, but in the sense that Punk can now call himself the "Face of the WWE." Of course, Cena and Punk can continue their rivalry, perhaps with Punk poking the bear that is Cena. You could easily carry it right though until Survivor Series, where Team Punk could face Team Cena in the main event.

As for that Zack Ryder heel turn I mentioned -- people are right when they talk about Ryder not really being able to carry the ball yet. He's over, but he's been lacking something lately. What really endears Zack Ryder to people is the self-made charm his "I really want to make it" character has. And yeah, Ryder is over. But imagine how much a heel turn would really wrench at people. Imagine if Ryder's ambition was rotated, and instead of making cheap YouTube videos, he motivated some of his fellow "mistreated" peers and led them as part of a "Revolution" against the current WWE landscape.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar could possibly be made to mean even more by having control of the WWE on the line. If Triple H wins, he remains in control of the WWE; if Brock Lesnar wins, Paul Heyman takes over as Chief Operating Officer of WWE.

[Mr. C]

I’d like to see more characters, as opposed to heroes and villains. A character can’t hang his hat on wanting to be champion forever, especially if that character has been champion multiple times in the past.

[dingdongyo]

Originally Posted by Fox But when he turned heel he exploded. Yes, he turned off the kiddies and alienated them against him, but it was the biggest thing ever because his heel character was just so good.

an argument against this is kids are the vast majority of the audience. they drop millions of dollars on this guy as a hero. could a turn pay off? if every adult that welcomed it bought 10 bad guy cena shirts, maybe.

i would be interested by it too. but i'm not buying 10 fucking shirts for it.

[Fox]

Originally Posted by dingdongyo an argument against this is kids are the vast majority of the audience. they drop millions of dollars on this guy as a hero. could a turn pay off? if every adult that welcomed it bought 10 bad guy cena shirts, maybe. i would be interested by it too. but i'm not buying 10 fucking shirts for it.

But going back to my previous analogy, that's no different than what WCW was in 95/96, and even going forward all the way to 98. I was only 9 or 10 around that time.

When Hogan turned they sold MORE merchandise. nWo merchandise exploded off the shelves. Everyone had an nWo t-shirt. But more so than that, the people who stood up to face off against Hogan and his nWo cronies sold merchandise too. They became bigger stars just by opposing Hogan and the nWo. Sting, DDP, Goldberg - these guys sold tons of merchandise.

Yes, there is a potential for merchandise loss if John Cena turned. It's almost unavoidable. But as long as his new character also came with a new logo and new gimmick, then that means new t-shirts, and fans of the heel Cena character will eat that stuff up. And if the Summer of Punk proved anything, it's that as long as you have a cool t-shirt like the Best In the World shirt, the guy who goes against John Cena is going to sell merchandise, too.

People look at the situation of Cena turning heel with a very narrow point of view. "Oh, they'll lose merchandise sales and they'll lose this and they'll lose that." What people don't realize is that a Cena heel turn would be good for business because it means better storylines, the elevation of guys into Cena's spot and merchandise sales for those guys, and a huge potential for better PPV buyrates and better TV ratings. What they would lose in the kiddie Cena fan base (which is growing up into teenhood very rapidly, I might add) would be gained back two-fold in other areas.

[#1-norm-fan]

Originally Posted by Noid John Cena should win Money in the Bank at the PPV, and then CM Punk and he start their tension. Punk tells Cena that he's going to cash in just like everyone else. Cena says "I'm not like you -- I've got hustle, loyalty and respect" and all that jazz. On the 1000th edition of RAW, Punk and Bryan have a Submission Match or something like that, and in a rage, some heels attack Punk (perhaps a freshly turned Zack Ryder with Curt Hawkins and Tyler Reks... more on that in a second) and Cena runs out for the save. Cena then nails Punk with his briefcase and cashes in, becoming the 11-time WWE Champion. This really sets the build for Cena vs. Punk at SummerSlam into motion. Punk would actually have a moral case against Cena, who has not turned heel, but has shown himself to be human and capable of going against what he preaches sometimes.

Pretty sure that would constitute a heel turn if he preaches doing the right thing by not cashing in in a weasel-like fashion and then proceeds to do just that.

If you're going face vs. face, Cena is going to go right back to getting booed heavily and being resented by half the crowd for taking the title away from Punk.

[Wehttam]

hmmmm here is another thread that mr c. just completely plagiarized....

MORE EVIDENCE FOR THE PEOPLE:

a few hours after this is posted on rajah... (Thread titled: How do you make the matches matter?)

(spoilered due to long quote-age)

SPOILER: show

Originally Posted by Wolverine04Grad After quite a few years as a huge fans of professional wrestling (mostly WWF/E), I've heard quite a few complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most television matches seems to matter. With the exception of matches that are clearly defined as Championship or No. 1 Contender's matches, very few of the outcomes of matches shown on television (even a lot of pay-per-view matches) have any effect on a wrestler's place on the card or his standing in relation to the WWE or World Championship. Sure, it's easy to spot a wrestler's place on the card by the amount of television time devoted to him and the placement of his matches on the television show and pay-per-views, and it's obvious that the more TV time he's garnering, the closer he is to getting one of the belts. But winning and losing doesn't seem to have much of an effect on the chase for the title belts. Consequently, it's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and Smackdown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much (again, unless a title match or the belt itself is specifically on the line). When I watch my favorite baseball or football team play, I care deeply about whether they win or lose, because I know how winning or losing affects their chances at winning a championship. I don't feel that way about my favorite wrestlers, though, because there is a disconnect between winning or losing on RAW and getting a title shot. I could think of multiple examples, but the one that sticks out most in the current product is Dolph Ziggler. Like most of the IWC folks, I'm a big Dolph fan, and I think he's a future star of the company. And based on the amount of TV time he's received for the last year, I think WWE feels the same way. He is one of the few guys nowadays that I stop and watch every time he's on screen. And I was happy to see him get a title shot at the last pay-per-view, but it hit me: besides winning the No. 1 Contender's match on RAW, what had he done to earn a title shot? It sure seemed like he had done a lot of jobbing lately (albeit mostly jobbing to main event guys). Sure enough, I checked a website that tracks win-loss records for televised WWE shows, and Ziggler has won only 11 of his 39 televised matches this year. He had lost his last nine televised matches (about two months' worth) before winning the No. 1 Contender's match. Now, none of the "real" sports teams that I follow would be anywhere near a championship game if they had won only 11 of their 39 matches during the season. And although WWE doesn't acknowledge win-loss records, I feel like most fans know when a guy loses a lot. And this isn't just a Ziggler argument. Very rarely does WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt. So my question is this: does it even matter to you that most televised matches don't seem to affect the title hunt? And if it does matter, what can WWE do to make matches seem relevant to the title hunt?

this thread and post come along...

Originally Posted by Mr. C After quite a few years as a fan of professional wrestling, I’ve heard complaints about the product, some valid and some not. The one that bugs me more than any other is how little the outcome of most matches seems to matter. It's hard to become emotionally invested in most of the matches on RAW and SmackDown, because who wins doesn't seem to matter much. Very rarely does the WWE try to establish how a match on television affects the title hunt. An Intercontinental title match should be an adequate RAW main event, but with having so much time to fill with content these days, it really won’t happen. I know the idea is that you’re in this business to become the WWE Champion, but not everyone there is the champion. That’s lost in creative, as well as some of the wrestlers who are just pegged to become stars right out the gate. Yes, I want guys like Dolph Ziggler and Wade Barrett to get the title and have a reign, but when they’re not challenging for the title or fighting John Cena, they’re lost in the shuffle.

cmon man. time for your own ideas.

[Wehttam]

well someone doesn't want to discuss in the open why he straight up steals other posts.... it is quite the odd behavior...

hmm mr. c, i'm sure if 'nobody cared', you wouldn't neg rep me. i wonder where you copied that statement from anyway....

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan Pretty sure that would constitute a heel turn if he preaches doing the right thing by not cashing in in a weasel-like fashion and then proceeds to do just that. If you're going face vs. face, Cena is going to go right back to getting booed heavily and being resented by half the crowd for taking the title away from Punk.

No it wouldn't. Cena would get people talking without actually turning.

John Cena wins the WWE Championship Money in the Bank, knocking Chris Jericho off the ladder last, onto Kane and Big Show, pulling the briefcase down and earning a title shot any time he wants in the coming year. Later in the show Josh Mathews in interviewing Cena when CM Punk walks onto the scene.

"Congratulations John. You beat four former WWE Champions (I see The Miz and Rey Mysterio making surprise returns) to earn a shot at me and the WWE Title whenever you want. So pal -- when is it going to be? After I go through hell and back with Daniel Bryan tonight, are you going to run out and cash in?"

"If I were you, Punk, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd be worrying about Daniel Bryan and that nutjob that's reffing your match tonight. But for the record -- hustle, loyalty, respect -- when I'm comin', Punk -- you'll know it."

That night, Punk and Bryan have their longest WWE match yet, and Bryan eventually gets into AJ's face, so she kicks him in the balls which allows Punk to hit the GTS and retain the WWE Title. AJ then skips off as Punk celebrates. John Cena coming out and applauding Punk from the ramp is optional.

The story heading into the 1000th RAW is then Daniel Bryan complaining that he was screwed over by AJ and should get yet another shot at the WWE Title. Perhaps Christian could come out on the first RAW and say tell Bryan that "You remind me of someone" and the two can have a great TV match heading into the 1000th RAW, where guest GM whoever announces Bryan will get another shot against CM Punk -- perhaps the Submission Match people have rumoured they'd have. Punk manages to make Bryan submit to the Anaconda Vise -- ending their feud -- but a pissed off Bryan attacks Punk from behind and tosses him around the ring, maybe yelling "You are not better than me!" Cena runs out for the save and cracks his briefcase over the head of Bryan, knocking him out of the ring and to the floor. Cena then regards the hurt Punk in the ring.

John Cena, in his John Cena way, would look at Punk, then down at his briefcase, then down at Punk, then at his briefcase. He then looks at the audience -- some of them cheering and some of them booing. Cena then blasts Punk over the head with it. Michael Cole starts going off on commentary "Cena is cashing in!" and then King says "No Cole -- he's just sending a message to Punk, Cena won't cash in like this." Cena then pulls the referee aside who talks to Justin Roberts, and Roberts announces that Cena is cashing in! Michael Cole stresses that "Cena is cashing in!" as King freaks out: "Whaaaaat?!?" "Cena's cashing in! Cena's cashing in!" Cena then hits Punk with an Attitude Adjustment and the referee counts Punk down and Cena is the new WWE Champion.

Cole immediately starts calling Cena on being a liar: "Cena said that Punk would see it coming!" and King plays it off "Punk did see the briefcase -- right before it cracked him in the head!" and then goes on to explain that "Cena had every right to cash in as he did," as Cole calls King a "John Cena sympathizer."

The following week, John Cena opens the show and says he has some explaining to do. Cena says that Punk owes his first two World Championships to the exact same method that John Cena earned at Money in the Bank by beating four former WWE Champions. Cena says that he knows he ruffled a few people's feathers by cashing in the way he did -- but how does that make John Cena any different from any other Money in the Bank Winner. All he did was exactly what anyone else of sane mind would do. It was also important that CM Punk did not see it coming.

Punk interrupts Cena and says that he's not upset that Cena cashed in the way he did. In fact, he feels validated. He's forever been saying that Cena is nothing but a phony. "Hustle, loyalty, respect -- they're just mantras you mouth off to sell t-shirts for Vince and Hunter, John. But when I say I'm The Best in the World, I mean it." Cena refers to the WWE Championship and tells Punk that this says he's lying. Cena then says that he knows Punk would have done the exact same thing if he was in Cena's shoes, and everybody knows it -- he did it twice before. All Cena did was give Punk a dose of his own medicine. Punk doesn't give a damn about this company or the WWE Championship -- he held it at ransom last year! Cena says that Punk is the biggest phony out here, and he's been a phony since he started calling himself "The Best in the World."

Cue SummerSlam match.

Originally Posted by Fox But going back to my previous analogy, that's no different than what WCW was in 95/96, and even going forward all the way to 98. I was only 9 or 10 around that time. When Hogan turned they sold MORE merchandise. nWo merchandise exploded off the shelves. Everyone had an nWo t-shirt. But more so than that, the people who stood up to face off against Hogan and his nWo cronies sold merchandise too. They became bigger stars just by opposing Hogan and the nWo. Sting, DDP, Goldberg - these guys sold tons of merchandise. Yes, there is a potential for merchandise loss if John Cena turned. It's almost unavoidable. But as long as his new character also came with a new logo and new gimmick, then that means new t-shirts, and fans of the heel Cena character will eat that stuff up. And if the Summer of Punk proved anything, it's that as long as you have a cool t-shirt like the Best In the World shirt, the guy who goes against John Cena is going to sell merchandise, too. People look at the situation of Cena turning heel with a very narrow point of view. "Oh, they'll lose merchandise sales and they'll lose this and they'll lose that." What people don't realize is that a Cena heel turn would be good for business because it means better storylines, the elevation of guys into Cena's spot and merchandise sales for those guys, and a huge potential for better PPV buyrates and better TV ratings. What they would lose in the kiddie Cena fan base (which is growing up into teenhood very rapidly, I might add) would be gained back two-fold in other areas.

Big difference. Hogan is a crossover, iconic character. One of the most recognizable people in the world. Cena isn't remotely close to his level. Cena turning heel would draw no new fans. It'd just shuffle the chairs of the existing fans, because wrestling isn't that big anymore. People aren't tired of Cena and the ones who are boo him mercilessly, which validates not turning him heel because he draws a massive reaction anyway.