WWE Off-Topic

[dochalladay32]

Quote: Originally Posted by soltrain

My problem with it, and I think it was others, too, is that we just all knew that feud was so forced. It was hard to get into.

No worse than Sheamus/Bryan which seemed to have more of a feud after Wrestlemania than going in.

[soltrain]

Quote: Originally Posted by dochalladay32

No worse than Sheamus/Bryan which seemed to have more of a feud after Wrestlemania than going in.

Well, at least that had the Royal Rumble as a reason.

[dochalladay32]

Quote: Originally Posted by soltrain

Well, at least that had the Royal Rumble as a reason.

Yea, but it seems they did almost nothing with it. One of the worst Rumble to Wrestlemania build-ups I can recall. It was just as forced as Kane/Orton. Should have just had Y2J win it and challenge Punk. There was an actual feud there.

[soltrain]

Quote: Originally Posted by dochalladay32

Yea, but it seems they did almost nothing with it. One of the worst Rumble to Wrestlemania build-ups I can recall. It was just as forced as Kane/Orton. Should have just had Y2J win it and challenge Punk. There was an actual feud there.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I thought all of the builds ups were pretty terrible (sans Taker/HHH). Orton/Kane just seemed especially, "Oh ****. These two need to do something!"

[TheShizNo1]

Am I the only won tired of this Brodus Clay crap? Why the hell is he like Goldberg all of a sudden? I hate seeing guys like Ziggler and Miz job to him.

[areobee401]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheShizNo1

Am I the only won tired of this Brodus Clay crap? Why the hell is he like Goldberg all of a sudden? I hate seeing guys like Ziggler and Miz job to him.

Most of the guys who post in the weekly Raw thread feel the exact same way.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Curious to get some of the OS Wrestling Experts' thoughts on this, which I thought was an interesting read:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...ar-matters-wwe

[TheShizNo1]

Quote: Originally Posted by ProfessaPackMan

Curious to get some of the OS Wrestling Experts' thoughts on this, which I thought was an interesting read: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...ar-matters-wwe

Nice read, but I think it's a little too deep. Meaning, the way story lines play out, I'm not sure they were setting Cena up for these awesome story telling matches. I could be wrong though. Punk was as hot as he'd ever been. It made no sense for The Rock to win, other than, it was The Rock. I agree w/ the Brock stuff to a degree. I like how they present Johnny Ace. To me, it's been that since Cena has been on top, they just haven't given him anyone. His feud w/ Miz and Punk were good. Even Brock. But it's a one and done thing. How many times did we see a combination of SCSA versus The Rock versus Triple H versus The Undertaker? They just had to develop new stories, better matches. They don't do that now. No reason there can't be different versions of Punk versus Cena versus Miz versus Ziggler.

So they have their golden child, but many times don't know what to do w/ him, b/c he always has to be the underdog or "I bleed for his company yada yada" character. That's why fans have been screaming for, not just a heel turn, but at the very least a character change.