The thread where we get CyNick to defend maligned storylines, and tell us how we don't understand...

[Mr. Nerfect]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Most people on here cant see the larger picture. Sting vs Hunter at Mania was used to sell future Monday Night Wars programming on WWE Network. Thats why they involved NWO (representing WCW and DX representing WWE). From thats standpoint alone it made sense for Hunter to win, because WWE won the war. BEYOND THAT, you want to keep Hunter strong because he's going to work with Rollins at some point. And further, the story they were telling between Hunter (the teacher) and Rollins (the student), it hurts the story if Hunter looks weak right off the bat. I personally dont think there was huge money in other Sting matches. I could be wrong, but the guy was in TNA for years, and its not like TNA ever had a really successful PPV that he was a part of. So I dont see where the evidence is that Sting was big time player. Thats the disconnect with some of you guys, you see Sting on the level of guys like Brock, Rock or Hunter, where I dont think the average fan does.

Sigh, one last time:

* It shouldn't have been used for that reason. Triple H was the heel; Sting was the face. The WWE vs. WCW thing doesn't make sense. If you defend what happens without acknowledging what shouldn't have happened, then you're not seeing as big a picture as you think you are, chum.

* Triple H is forever strong. He's not losing to JTG on Superstars.

* The fans do see Sting on that level -- your own argument works against you. That's why people care so much that the WWE fucked it up.

* If your modern 8-year old WWE fan doesn't? You MAKE them. It's fucking storytelling.