The biggest problem with the WWE is that fans cant accept change.

[Sebastian]

If the fans couldn't accept change, they wouldn't have ever accepted Cena, Batista, Orton, etc. The spinner belt is crap. Sorry. That has less to do with new ideas and not wanting to see wigger crap on TV. But then, change for the sake of being different, change with no other purpose, is terrible in both concept and execution, which seems to be what you're endorsing appreciation of.

Incorrect!

Are the fans really accepting Cena, Batista and Orton? Doesn't seem so to me. There is a lot of complaining and unjustified comments made about all three men, Cena and Batista especially. People complain frequently about how Batista shouldnt be getting another title shot when, lets face it, the man is one of this generation's greatest young stars. Batista is what HHH was to late 90's.

Cena is the face of the company and many say he doesnt deserve it, but he paid his dues and he is one of the best total packages in the WORLD. John Cena is to 2000-2010 what Hogan was to 1980-1995 and what Rock/Austin was to late 90's. He is the "IT".

Orton too gets a lot of complaints. Yes, his face run was poor but he is an AMAZING heel and gets way too much flack and not enough praise.

Everyone likes to say "Why is the WWE trying to create a new Rock/Austin? These guys arent Rock/Austin, they suck!". This is simply not true and is false logic because they don't suck, they are just different. It is a new time and time for younger stars.

As far as "Wigger Crap", lets come face to face with reality. WWE is a multi billion dollar company who entertains people. In order to do this, they need to stay on top of the pack and on top of trends. Lets face it, Hip Hop culture is currently where it's at and that is what John Cena represents. He connects to this segment of the population so it works. Its just like Hogan was "All American" in the 80's.

I am not endorsing change for the sake of change, I am endorsing positive change but people seem to think that all change is change for the sake of change.

It seems Sebastien has a problem accepting opinions that are different to his own.

You're wrong, I have not said anyones opinion is wrong.

If the fans couldn't accept change, there would have been no Attitude Era.

EXACTLY!

And that is why ratings are in the gutters right now compared to the Attitude era. Back then, people embraced culture and change and thats why the product got so popular. But now people are fussy and reluctant to accept a rising new generation of stars!

For example, other than the retarded finish to RAW, the last few Monday nights have been a vast improvement over the last... well, several years. The "anything can happen" element makes RAW so much more watchable than it has been in a long time. A new face in the main event scene, a renewed interest in the tag division, a feud between two of the most talented wrestlers of this generation that's involving some of the best workers of the next one... There are a lot of things that have changed that we like.

Well maybe I am not reading deep enough because I dont see too many people writing about some of the recent changes as being good. Instead of saying how good WWE is booking RAW, people complain that Batista laid out CM Punk...which is GOOD BOOKING 101 (No, not because I have anything against Punk, but because it creates REAL heat between the stars).

My problem with the Diva's title is there isn't enough room to have two women's titles.

Not true, there are a lot of Divas in the WWE and they are spread over TWO brands. It makes no sense to have cool divas like Cherry, Victoria and Nagalia on Smackdown and not have a title for them to fight over. It is a much needed change that has been needed for a long time.

There is a reason not to accept something that is changing from good to garbage.

What exactly is "garbage" about it? Young new superstars getting a shot at the big time? An exciting new title and expansion of women's wrestling (which is gaining popularity in America because even TNA managed to get a rating boost from women) and more rough storylines that are more gritty? I dont see it, sorry!

What's wrong with this thread?

Nothing, except maybe that indy title Punk is holding is nowhere near being on par with the rest of them.

I think the mistake that WWE did with Cena's title was when HHH won it and kept it looking the same. The point of the title was that a champ can customize it, like when Edge won it after Cena. HHH should have replaced the center with his skull logo. This, I admit is a place where WWE errored!

Lets come to terms with reality guys. Things are constantly changing and just because they are, it doesnt mean its bad. It seems to be that people's instinctive reaction is to be unhappy with change and then try to justify it and be happy later rather then just take it in and see where it goes as it goes.

Of course, we are all happy to see Punk with the big belt, but even that, I see some criticism over his first feud with Batista.

Come on, the man is feuding with the top dog in the yard, it wouldnt make sense to have him beat up on Batista. It makes sense for Punk to be an underdog here...but thats a whole thread on its own. (This feud is qyite a dileema to book. Do you WEAKEN Batista by giving him a loss or do you ruin your young champ's first reign?)

Also I dont see why people are so angry if a big face goes on a winning streak like Cena did. It is called the mechanics of the wrestling business. You want a guy to suceed, you make him look good and a winning streak helps with that. And Cena's winning streak was actually good and not a bunch of jobber squashings like Goldberg or Kozlov is doing now.

[jcmoorehead]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Incorrect! Are the fans really accepting Cena, Batista and Orton? Doesn't seem so to me. There is a lot of complaining and unjustified comments made about all three men, Cena and Batista especially. People complain frequently about how Batista shouldnt be getting another title shot when, lets face it, the man is one of this generation's greatest young stars. Batista is what HHH was to late 90's.

People were perfectly willing to accept all three and still are. However you speak about change and Batista constantly getting title shots for over a year now is hardly change within the WWE is it? If anything it's the exact same thing over and over again.

Originally Posted by Sebastian Cena is the face of the company and many say he doesnt deserve it, but he paid his dues and he is one of the best total packages in the WORLD. John Cena is to 2000-2010 what Hogan was to 1980-1995 and what Rock/Austin was to late 90's. He is the "IT".

Again it's not that people don't feel Cena doesn't deserve it. It's the fact that he has been shoved down our throats as a superman that has annoyed everyone and causes people to tune out. When he won the title the first time it was the same exact thing every month. Again there was no change there.

Originally Posted by Sebastian Everyone likes to say "Why is the WWE trying to create a new Rock/Austin? These guys arent Rock/Austin, they suck!". This is simply not true and is false logic because they don't suck, they are just different. It is a new time and time for younger stars.

I have never heard anyone around here saying that. I've seen people saying "That guy looks like he could be the next Austin" when referring to people like Kennedy or mentioning the Rock when referring to people like MVP but I have never seen anyone complain about them trying to create a new Rock/Austin. Nor have i seen people complain about the stars not being Rock/Austin.

And yes we know it is a time for younger stars and if anything that is what a lot of the fans want to see.

Originally Posted by Sebastian Well maybe I am not reading deep enough because I dont see too many people writing about some of the recent changes as being good. Instead of saying how good WWE is booking RAW, people complain that Batista laid out CM Punk...which is GOOD BOOKING 101 (No, not because I have anything against Punk, but because it creates REAL heat between the stars).

Why would real heat between the stars be a good thing? Surely you'd want what you consider to be your top two stars to be on at least decent terms with each other.

Also why is squashing the champion of the show in a minute good booking 101? Good booking to me would be for one of them to win by a narrow margin after a decent contest. Squashing the champion makes them look weak and makes it look like the company doesn't care too much about them.

I understand it was a dark match and was only seen by the people in the arena so we shouldn't really take too much from it.

Originally Posted by Sebastian Also I dont see why people are so angry if a big face goes on a winning streak like Cena did. It is called the mechanics of the wrestling business. You want a guy to suceed, you make him look good and a winning streak helps with that. And Cena's winning streak was actually good and not a bunch of jobber squashings like Goldberg or Kozlov is doing now.

It wasn't about the winning streak he had. It was more how the winning streak was done. You mention how it was good as opposed to Goldbergs, yet many people will tell you that Goldbergs streak was probably one of the best ways to do that sort of angle.

Yes you want your champion to look good but you need to balance it between looking good and taking the piss. The fact that Cena constantly overcame the odds wasn't good booking it was just their way of forcing him down our throats. After a short while it became predictable and people wanted it to change.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Sebastian Incorrect! Are the fans really accepting Cena, Batista and Orton? Doesn't seem so to me. There is a lot of complaining and unjustified comments made about all three men, Cena and Batista especially.

Which counters your argument. They were supported. There was a Cena bandwagon, an Orton bandwagon, and a Batista bandwagon. The Batswagon was splintery and had a bad wheel, but it was there.

You know when these guys started losing support?

When "Spoiler: Cena Wins!" Became a joke.

When "If Orton Rest Holds, we Riot" became a joke.

When Barista earned a title shot every fucking week.

The fans, the IWC were behind the new guys. They were behind the "change." And then WWE made these guys stale and boring and killed the interest. The common thread here is that the IWC supports a shitload of people. Edge, Marella, that cokehead who recently won a title belt...

So...Ummm...Yeah.