Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

[BDKiiing]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Then why does the question of "why do we even cheer or boo anymore?" even get asked if the indie darlings and their fans don't care about heel or face?

They're just a special case. The Shield is heel, but Tyler Black and Jon Moxley still have huge support.

Punk's shoot was initially thought to turn him heel, and it got him crazy over.

Dragon started yelling "No!" and the Yes' just got louder.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Then maybe the indie fans are the ones responsible for the heel/face blur now and not the company?

[OSUFan_88]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

You lost me at win over Taker at Mania. What in the world? All this for a Taker match? If he faces Taker it wouldn't make sense in this story stemming from August and Summerslam. Thats as random as it gets. Plus nobody is beating Taker. So yeah.

First of all, someone should be beating Taker, because it's stupid not to.

Second, think about it. Triple H had three tries to defeat Taker. HBK had two. Neither of them would do it. Bryan repeatedly gets told that he cannot be the Face of the WWE because no one believes he can be. Bryan says "**** it, I'm going to challenge Taker."

Bryan wins and becomes a mega star. Gains his Face of the WWE status, and becomes the top face for years and years.

Pretty easy, although this is assuming long term booking is still a thing so...yeah, probably just fantasy booking.

[BDKiiing]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Then maybe the indie fans are the ones responsible for the heel/face blur now and not the company?

They're a small minority. I've been following Punk since 2005, Danielson 2006-07, Tyler Black 2009, Chris Hero 2008, Claudio Castangoli 2008.

I support them by buying tshirts, pulling for them in matches. Why shouldn't I? If I've been a fan of their work for that long why shouldn't I be a fan? But there are times where I appreciate the wrestlers work, that if I am there live, I will boo if they are a heel, just to help them out.

[Redacted01]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

This thread gets more posts before the event than most complete Raw threads these days. And half of the posts are of those that say they want to basically give up on the product.

[Bellsprout]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Then maybe the indie fans are the ones responsible for the heel/face blur now and not the company?

In an interesting twist, there are reports indicating that Vince McMahon said in a recent WWE creative meeting that the idea of "babyfaces" and "heels" will be phased out, as there are no truly "good" or "bad" people in real life. Vince has supposedly been toying with this idea for quite some time but met resistance from other officials who were against changing a formula that had been working for about half a century. With other major shakeups in WWE's formula already happening (title unification) and coming up down the line (WWE Network potentially eliminating PPVs,) it seems that this may be the time for WWE to try out another new idea.

http://www.cagesideseats.com/2013/12/30/5255908/rumor-roundup-for-monday-december-30-royal-rumble-2014-cm-punk-retirement-batista

Just something that was making the rounds in the dirt sheets a few weeks back.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Interesting. I know they've picked up on that change because it's pretty obvious. People are cheering and booing who they want to, rather than what the storyline dictates. It's a very interesting dynamic for long-time wrestling fans.

As for Taker, I don't think Taker should lose at WM. He should beat whoever he faces at WM this year, and lose at Summerslam to finally retire.

[kingkilla56]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

First of all, someone should be beating Taker, because it's stupid not to.

Second, think about it. Triple H had three tries to defeat Taker. HBK had two. Neither of them would do it. Bryan repeatedly gets told that he cannot be the Face of the WWE because no one believes he can be. Bryan says "**** it, I'm going to challenge Taker."

Bryan wins and becomes a mega star. Gains his Face of the WWE status, and becomes the top face for years and years.

Pretty easy, although this is assuming long term booking is still a thing so...yeah, probably just fantasy booking.

I doubt anyone beats Taker. And just because Bryan beats Taker what does that have to do with the Authority not giving a ****? He beat Cena and Orton for the belts already, What does beating 80 year old, once a year do to change their mindset about it? How does beating Taker gain him face of the company status? This isnt trying to get Bryan over with the crowd territory. This is convincing the authority Bryan is worthy of not being ****ed with constantly. I don't see what Taker has to do with that dynamic of the authority story. undertaker isnt a part of the authority. Bryan needs to be facing Triple H at Wrestlemania if not challenging for the belt. Not sure why they havent thought of that. Him beating H at Mania would be able to calm the riots imo.

This thread gets more posts before the event than most complete Raw threads these days. And half of the posts are of those that say they want to basically give up on the product.

I havent seen anybody basically give up on the product in here yet.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

You don't think being the guy they choose to FINALLY beat Undertaker at Wrestlemania, especially after some of the people who failed to beat him and especially after the big deal they've made about it in recent years is a big deal? They'd only be doing that because of how far Bryan has come and how popular he's gotten.

Having HIM be the guy to beat Undertaker would be monumental, earth-shattering. It shouldn't be this way, but beating Undertaker would do more to propel and cement him than having the title ever could nowadays. It means more than the title right now. Again, it shouldn't be this way (the title should always mean the most) but that's the way it is.

Now, does it fit neatly into the storyline? No not really. You'd have to do some major work to make it do so. I'm just talking about beating Taker independent of storylines at the moment.

[Bellsprout]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

I think Bryan beating Taker would be massive (and he might be the only person the fans would accept doing it) for him. He gets that, and storyline-wise it's almost impossible to imagine a scenario where he doesn't use that momentum to convince the Authority that he's worthy of that title.

Imagine him walking into HHH's office that following night, armed with the ammunition that he did what HHH tried TWICE to do and failed.

EDIT: Make that THRICE. I, like WWE, forgot their match at Wrestlemania X7 happened.

[kingkilla56]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

You don't think being the guy they choose to FINALLY beat Undertaker at Wrestlemania, especially after some of the people who failed to beat him and especially after the big deal they've made about it in recent years is a big deal? They'd only be doing that because of how far Bryan has come and how popular he's gotten.

Having HIM be the guy to beat Undertaker would be monumental, earth-shattering. It shouldn't be this way, but beating Undertaker would do more to propel and cement him than having the title ever could nowadays. It means more than the title right now. Again, it shouldn't be this way (the title should always mean the most) but that's the way it is.

Now, does it fit neatly into the storyline? No not really. You'd have to do some major work to make it do so. I'm just talking about beating Taker independent of storylines at the moment.

Yes if Bryan beat Taker it would be earth shattering. But you have to bring it back into the storyline they have been working since August. It doesnt make sense. The authority wouldnt give two ****s that he beat Taker. That wouldnt logically convince them of anything. Bryan has beaten EVERYONE and still gets no love.

HHH would come out and say "good job Bryan you beat taker, now go take a seat in the back" then he'll make some dickhead comment about Taker being much older and vulnerable now. Bryan has to beat HHH to win over the authority. That is what makes that story, stemming since Summerslam, make sense. Not Taker.

[Redacted01]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Its in Cleveland, and I thought about going, but not happening now.

I'm seriously trying to find a way to get my money back for this PPV and the tickets I just recently bought for a show coming up.

I was seriously considering buying tickets to a show they have coming to Vegas in February but yeah **** all that.

Watching solely to see the crowd (hopefully) **** on the entire show.

I'm really only watching RAW for one reason and that is to see the fans reaction. I want to see what they do, if what people mentioned on reddit actually happened (turned their backs on anything WWE that isn't Bryan or Punk[unless with the Authority]{I would include AJ on that list}), I would mark the hell out. Boo'ing Batista is the wrong way to approach it, because they are going to push him like a heel, so if you give no reaction, that's incredibly way worse, let alone turning your back on the action.

It really seems that the company doesn't know what they are doing, it also doesn't help with all the HHH guys were relevant at the Rumble(NAO, Orton, Batista, Nash.)

This is the time that I wish TNA was actually garbage, so that there was something else to watch.

I want this to be a work so hard with the Foley stuff and everybody else in the company and used to be in the company trashing it, I would be incredibly happy and give mad props to HHH. But I have many of doubts that's it's not.

I missed the last Raw in Cleveland, but was at the previous 2. I was going to buy some cheap seats today if the Rumble talked me into it. We know how that ended up. I hope Cleveland makes a scene of it. I just don't get it. I just don't get it.

In other news, The Shield is supposed to be on our local radio in a bit. Not sure how that's gonna go lol.

So asking for refunds, only watching to see what fans do, having no interest to going into an event isn't giving up? That sounds about as indifferent as you can get.

[PVarck31]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

So asking for refunds, only watching to see what fans do, having no interest to going into an event isn't giving up? That sounds about as indifferent as you can get.

So I take it you've never said something you didn't mean out of passion or emotion?

[TheShizNo1]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Doc, go halt interesting conversation somewhere else.



I agree with King. While it would be cool to see DB win, what does it have to do with the storyline angle? We're back to just throwing **** together and seeing where it goes.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[Redacted01]

Re: Raw 1/27/14: If you quit watching for awhile, I wouldn't blame you.

Doc, go halt interesting conversation somewhere else.



I agree with King. While it would be cool to see DB win, what does it have to do with the storyline angle? We're back to just throwing **** together and seeing where it goes.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

No one says you have to care what I write, but you sure comment on it enough. goh's famous (almost last) words, there's an ignore button. Put it to use if you're so inclined.