Make matches matter

[Fox]

Originally Posted by Gertner For the last time: Cena doesn't need to turn heel. He's the PERFECT wrestler. People either LOVE him or HATE him, so he's perfect because regardless, he always draws a reaction. Pretty much anybody can go up against Cena and get over be it a face or a heel.

I don't buy that.

The same argument could have been made for Hulk Hogan in 1995/96. He was in about the same state as Cena is now: the kids still loved him and cheered for him, but the older audience booed him and didn't buy his schtick anymore. Regardless, he got "a reaction" wherever he went.

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.

Cena "works" right now because of the reasons you listed, and there's no argument that that is true. But to say that he couldn't be even bigger and a better asset to the entertainment and storyline aspect of the company as a mega heel is just unfounded. A full blown John Cena heel turn would be like an atomic bomb going off in the middle of the WWE universe. The kids would be shocked and alienated and terrified that their hero had turned evil. The adults and teens would love the fact that he had changed and become what they always thought he could become. And everyone would look to see who was going to step up and try and take down the monster that John Cena had become.

Of course, you'd need someone capable of writing that storyline and keeping it on track to make the thing really work. But a massive heel John Cena who got mega heat in every arena in the country against the TRUE babyface star of the company (see: someone who doesn't get a 50/50 reaction in every arena, but more like a 90/10 reaction), be it CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, an elevated Ryback, or whomever could be incredible in all aspects: entertainment value, good versus evil storylines, PPV buyrates and TV ratings.

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?

[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?

[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.

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.

[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.

[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....