Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 23:41:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 21:19:00 GMT -5
I assumed that by main event, you meant main event. I now realise that you meant that Alberto Del Rio was a bigger name to feud with than Triple H, which is ridiculous. Despite your high opinion of Triple H, yes, feuding for the WWE Championship is way more important. Anyone will tell you that, including CM Punk, who pretty much left for that exact reason. Why was CM Punk removed from the title picture following SummerSlam? Still waiting for a single logical theory from you that doesn't involve the WWE not wanting him to be bigger than Cena. Punk was back into the title picture at Hell in a Cell and then won the belt at Survivor Series. There's zero chance he ever would have taken the top spot from Cena regardless if he had stuck around and main evented in September and at Vengeance. Talent wise, he's a good fit for the main event but his personality isn't something you can really market like you can market John Cena, as much as that might pain you to read.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Aug 27, 2014 21:19:28 GMT -5
I remember that. Triple H literally just gave Cena a title match for no apparent reason when Cena came to see him in his office, thus rendering the entire tournament that Rey won pointless. He lost the WWE Championship a week prior, he didn't have a chance to use his rematch clause. Not hard to figure that one out. Since when does a rematch clause work the same way as MITB? I can't remember any other scenario where a guy was allowed to use his rematch clause for a title shot an hour after a guy won the title.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 23:41:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 21:21:17 GMT -5
He lost the WWE Championship a week prior, he didn't have a chance to use his rematch clause. Not hard to figure that one out. Since when does a rematch clause work the same way as MITB? I can't remember any other scenario where a guy was allowed to use his rematch clause for a title shot an hour after a guy won the title. Since the guy who he lost the title to wasn't around to give him a shot at the title? He lost the belt, was entitled to a shot at it since this is rasslin and guys get immediate rematches if they so choose and he got a shot at the champion. You're splitting hairs just to do it here.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Aug 27, 2014 21:21:43 GMT -5
Why was CM Punk removed from the title picture following SummerSlam? Because back in the real world, feuding with the COO Triple H is a much bigger deal than feuding with Alberto Del Rio. That's why CM Punk vs Triple H main evented the next PPV and John Cena vs Del Rio didn't. And the PPV after that, Punk was in the main event again, fighting for the title.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Aug 27, 2014 21:25:14 GMT -5
Despite your high opinion of Triple H, yes, feuding for the WWE Championship is way more important. Anyone will tell you that, including CM Punk, who pretty much left for that exact reason. Why was CM Punk removed from the title picture following SummerSlam? Still waiting for a single logical theory from you that doesn't involve the WWE not wanting him to be bigger than Cena. Punk was back into the title picture at Hell in a Cell and then won the belt at Survivor Series. There's zero chance he ever would have taken the top spot from Cena regardless if he had stuck around and main evented in September and at Vengeance. Talent wise, he's a good fit for the main event but his personality isn't something you can really market like you can market John Cena, as much as that might pain you to read. So, your reasoning as to why Punk wasn't left in the title picture following SummerSlam were all of the same reasons I listed about 15 replies ago - it didn't benefit Cena. Awesome, thanks for clearing that up.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Aug 27, 2014 21:28:15 GMT -5
Since when does a rematch clause work the same way as MITB? I can't remember any other scenario where a guy was allowed to use his rematch clause for a title shot an hour after a guy won the title. Since the guy who he lost the title to wasn't around to give him a shot at the title? He lost the belt, was entitled to a shot at it since this is rasslin and guys get immediate rematches if they so choose and he got a shot at the champion. You're splitting hairs just to do it here. Lol, you must write for this company trying to act like there's any logic in that booking whatsoever. Nobody gets a rematch for the title the same night the champion was in a match, and I most certainly don't remember John Cena ever getting a rematch that didn't occur at the following PPV except this one scenario, which is why it made it look that much bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Aug 27, 2014 21:29:32 GMT -5
Why was CM Punk removed from the title picture following SummerSlam? Because back in the real world, feuding with the COO Triple H is a much bigger deal than feuding with Alberto Del Rio. That's why CM Punk vs Triple H main evented the next PPV and John Cena vs Del Rio didn't. And the PPV after that, Punk was in the main event again, fighting for the title. Feuding with Triple H is more important than feuding for the title. Congratulations, you're officially one of two people on this planet that feel this way. The other is Triple H.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 23:41:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 21:33:30 GMT -5
Punk was back into the title picture at Hell in a Cell and then won the belt at Survivor Series. There's zero chance he ever would have taken the top spot from Cena regardless if he had stuck around and main evented in September and at Vengeance. Talent wise, he's a good fit for the main event but his personality isn't something you can really market like you can market John Cena, as much as that might pain you to read. So, your reasoning as to why Punk wasn't left in the title picture following SummerSlam were all of the same reasons I listed about 15 replies ago - it didn't benefit Cena. Awesome, thanks for clearing that up. Punk WAS LEFT in the title picture. He main evented Hell in a Cell CHALLENGING FOR THE TITLE, which is after SummerSlam. He won the title AT SURVIVOR SERIES WHICH IS AFTER SUMMERSLAM. He then proceeded to stay in the WWE title picture for 15 months AFTER he won the title which was AFTER SUMMERSLAM 2011. Since the guy who he lost the title to wasn't around to give him a shot at the title? He lost the belt, was entitled to a shot at it since this is rasslin and guys get immediate rematches if they so choose and he got a shot at the champion. You're splitting hairs just to do it here. Lol, you must write for this company trying to act like there's any logic in that booking whatsoever. Nobody gets a rematch for the title the same night the champion was in a match, and I most certainly don't remember John Cena ever getting a rematch that didn't occur at the following PPV except this one scenario, which is why it made it look that much bizarre. No, I'm someone who understands that they needed to get Cena the title so they could do the Punk/Cena SummerSlam match (not a Punk/Cena/Rey match where Punk returns out of nowhere which would have done nothing for their business whatsoever) and the ol' rematch clause was the way to do it. You're just a dude who tries to pick everything apart because someone you like didn't get what you wanted them to because it made no business sense.
|
|
|
Post by ThugSuperstar on Aug 27, 2014 22:28:11 GMT -5
So, your reasoning as to why Punk wasn't left in the title picture following SummerSlam were all of the same reasons I listed about 15 replies ago - it didn't benefit Cena. Awesome, thanks for clearing that up. Punk WAS LEFT in the title picture. He main evented Hell in a Cell CHALLENGING FOR THE TITLE, which is after SummerSlam. He won the title AT SURVIVOR SERIES WHICH IS AFTER SUMMERSLAM. He then proceeded to stay in the WWE title picture for 15 months AFTER he won the title which was AFTER SUMMERSLAM 2011. Lol, you must write for this company trying to act like there's any logic in that booking whatsoever. Nobody gets a rematch for the title the same night the champion was in a match, and I most certainly don't remember John Cena ever getting a rematch that didn't occur at the following PPV except this one scenario, which is why it made it look that much bizarre. No, I'm someone who understands that they needed to get Cena the title so they could do the Punk/Cena SummerSlam match (not a Punk/Cena/Rey match where Punk returns out of nowhere which would have done nothing for their business whatsoever) and the ol' rematch clause was the way to do it. You're just a dude who tries to pick everything apart because someone you like didn't get what you wanted them to because it made no business sense. You wanna know the irony here? You guys are the overly optimistic bunch who are always saying to wait for the payoff and see how things play out in angles that usually anybody can tell up front are going to be dreadful. Yet, in this case, you're actually trying to argue that exercising patience wouldn't have benefited an angle in which it clearly would have. It doesn't go both ways. You can't just use that excuse when it's convenient to and then say exercising patience is "bad for business" in other cases when it clearly isn't. If having patience in letting an angle play out is so bad, I guess you must've felt that way about Daniel Bryan's title win at Mania this year too, then, right?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 23:41:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 22:56:47 GMT -5
Where's next wins sixteen to defend another useless Cena title reign?
Oh wait....
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Aug 27, 2014 23:18:08 GMT -5
You wanna know the irony here? Is it that you complain every time you're expected to let something play out, but now you're doing a 180 and saying that everything should play out over a longer time period? I guess that is pretty ironic. Most of us have the ability to grasp things like reality, context and perspective -- and thus can understand that different situations call for different measures. The reality of WWE needing a SummerSlam 2011 main event, for example, meaning that everybody's fantasy booking ideas didn't get to play out (you may recall CM Punk explained this earlier). This reality then led to the reality of CM Punk main-eventing PPVs, and holding the WWE title for over a year -- a longer reign than either John Cena or Triple H has ever had, despite their apparent egos. Or the reality of Daniel Bryan's WrestleMania triumph being such a great moment because the story for the previous eight months had been about the powers that be screwing him over and he was finally overcoming them.
|
|
|
Post by Joe/Smurf on Aug 28, 2014 0:21:00 GMT -5
I was going through the WWE champs on WWE.COM And saw Rey won the WWE title a couple years ago? I do NOT remember this what so ever and i was watching in 2012 when punk took the title away. I DO remember Cena and Rey having a title match for the new WWE title, but Cena won that! Didn't he? How sure are you about that? Cause that didn't happen in 2012...
|
|
|
Post by RKOrton #ThankYouLesnar on Aug 28, 2014 1:34:55 GMT -5
I was going through the WWE champs on WWE.COM And saw Rey won the WWE title a couple years ago? I do NOT remember this what so ever and i was watching in 2012 when punk took the title away. I DO remember Cena and Rey having a title match for the new WWE title, but Cena won that! Didn't he? How sure are you about that? Cause that didn't happen in 2012... Mind=Blown. lol! No wonder i didn't remember, i thought that was in 2012, wow cannot believe that was in 2011! Time goes by so fast, earlier today i was telling a buddy of mine that hbk vs hogan was almost 10 years ago! And DAMN this thread got pretty heated. Hey to the guy defending HHH, dude just stop.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Aug 28, 2014 9:03:57 GMT -5
How sure are you about that? Cause that didn't happen in 2012... Mind=Blown. lol! No wonder i didn't remember, i thought that was in 2012, wow cannot believe that was in 2011! Time goes by so fast, earlier today i was telling a buddy of mine that hbk vs hogan was almost 10 years ago! And DAMN this thread got pretty heated. Hey to the guy defending HHH, dude just stop.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 19, 2024 23:41:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 9:53:53 GMT -5
How sure are you about that? Cause that didn't happen in 2012... Mind=Blown. lol! No wonder i didn't remember, i thought that was in 2012, wow cannot believe that was in 2011! Time goes by so fast, earlier today i was telling a buddy of mine that hbk vs hogan was almost 10 years ago! And DAMN this thread got pretty heated. Hey to the guy defending HHH, dude just stop. Triple H is a legend. Smart and talented. More legendary than a CM Punk or a Daniel Bryan will ever be. Regardless of the hatred from internet fans and shovel jokes, Triple H is deserving and well worth being defended.
|
|