Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 10:10:54 GMT -5
Enough months for it to happen on the grandest stage of all. You're OK with with nine plus months of no direction story lines / annoying story lines / shoe-horned story lines so long as there's a pay off at WrestleMania? I wish I had your patience. There was plenty of direction. We're you hibernating?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 10:23:48 GMT -5
You're OK with with nine plus months of no direction story lines / annoying story lines / shoe-horned story lines so long as there's a pay off at WrestleMania? I wish I had your patience. You whined about WWE not doing long-term payoffs, and then when someone referenced an incredible long-term payoff, you complain that it took too long. Never once whined nor whined about long-term payoffs. I don't see how asking a question in response or providing rebuttals is whining, but OK. I did ask "Name something WWE has done in recent years that gave us a big payoff we all were hoping for? WWE's game plan has been to turn the gun around and shoot themselves in the face and then ask questions later." This was asked in context of marino13's statement of "You can not build up the Ambrose vs Rollins feud for months and not give us the big payoff.". And with that (both sentences), I was implying that WWE's creative does not have long term goals in mind or gives us the cohesive story line to keep things interesting, and when we do get something it feels forced. Again, as I said before as well "My whole argument is that creative can't come up with these things organically and blows all their potential. Was DBry winning WMXXX what we wanted? Yes. Was it in the cards way in advance? Highly doubtful." Emphasis on the bold part. My argument is that his win at WMXXX was entirely forced (ask Batista how his win at Royal Rumble guaranteeing him a main event match for the title at WrestleMania went). While yes the end result was what we wanted, the build up was shoddy. Again, the build up was shoddy. Like marino13 said, "You can not build up the Ambrose vs Rollins feud for months and not give us the big payoff." just like you can not give us the big payoff without the build up. Those two go hand-in-hand. Its OK if you keep focusing the half about "big payoff" and not paying anything attention to "build up", really it is. I see you're just jumping on with Marino13 that he "got me" with me asking a question and posting a picture. I get it, its not right, but I get it. If you're going to tell me that WWE Creative had it in mind since before Summer Slam 2013 that Daniel Bryan was going to win the title at WMXXX then I was totally had. I'll give WWE Creative all the credit in the world for giving Bryan the win at Summer Slam that we all wanted, then took it away less than two minutes later, the stripping of the title at Night of Champions 2013, that approximate three week stint as a Wyatt, the three or so PPV matches with the Wyatts, and those three/four PPV matches against Randy Orton as entirely preplanned a year in advance to give him a WMXXX win. I wouldn't count three sloppy unconnected feuds mashed into one long stretch as an impressive build up. This is merely quantity over quality. I would hardly count that as an "incredible long-term payoff," and more of an about time payoff. He should have won at Summer Slam 2013 and remained the champion for the remainder of 2013 while he had the ENTIRE Universe behind him, but as I stated, WWE didn't execute it correctly and it all felt botched. But yes, completely isolated without any context or mention of the original statement of "build up" (which is what my initial comment was in reply to), Daniel Bryan winning at WrestleMania XXX was the big payoff we all wanted. I'll give your comment a like, because I like the use of the smiley face and your comprehension is top notch.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 10:32:17 GMT -5
Doesn't really do much for Orton's direction. "Loser faces Orton", granted, it wouldn't be billed like that but still. And what is the point of having a Cell match between Orton and the loser of another match where the 'real' beef is...? Not much in my opinion. Surely the heated up feuds should get the Cell match?
I really hope it ends up Ambrose vs Rollins in the main event.
|
|
|
Post by Slim on Oct 2, 2014 10:33:02 GMT -5
Can't wait to see a Cena vs Ambrose match.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 10:34:13 GMT -5
You're OK with with nine plus months of no direction story lines / annoying story lines / shoe-horned story lines so long as there's a pay off at WrestleMania? I wish I had your patience. There was plenty of direction. We're you hibernating? Nope. - Gets the big match at Summer Slam vs. John Cena and wins, then loses less than two minutes later to Randy Orton's cash in of Money in the Bank. - Wins against Randy Orton at Night of Champions - Gets stripped of the title the next night on Raw - Faces Randy Orton at Battleground to a no contest - Loses to Randy Orton at Hell in a Cell - Teams with CM Punk against the Wyatts - Loses to the Wyatts at TLC - Becomes a Wyatt Family member and leaves the Wyatt Family between TLC & Royal Rumble - Loses to Bray at Royal Rumble - Loses at Elimination Chamber - Wins at WrestleMania against Triple H then Randy Orton/Batista From Summer Slam to Hell in a Cell was all Authority / Randy Orton focused, then he does a Wyatt Family offshoot, then returns back to the Randy Orton / Authority angle. That Wyatt Family angle had no direction or business in the events that preceded or followed. I didn't just say only no direction, it was part of a list.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Oct 2, 2014 10:51:18 GMT -5
He should have won at Summer Slam 2013 and remained the champion for the remainder of 2013 while he had the ENTIRE Universe behind him, but as I stated, WWE didn't execute it correctly and it all felt botched. Ah, I didn't realise that by building up to a payoff, you actually meant "WWE doesn't let my favourites win straight away and then every night after that as well."
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Oct 2, 2014 11:03:10 GMT -5
This whole thing just seems like a tremendous "oh well, we've got nothing else" to me. Ambrose/Rollins should end in the cell, no matter what. Cena should never face Orton on Pay-Per-View again. Cena should have never gotten involved with this feud, plain and simple. It's all just lazy and listless.
Now, in all likelihood, we'll get a Cena/Rollins match nobody cares about, and an Ambrose/Orton match nobody cares about, both inside a cell. Neither match, of course, warrants a cell.
If they were that hell bent on throwing Cena at Rollins, they should have just kept Ambrose off TV longer.
Also, this idea makes Orton look like crap. "No one wants to face you, Randy, so the loser gets thrown in a match with you that no one cares about."
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Oct 2, 2014 11:03:27 GMT -5
You whined about WWE not doing long-term payoffs, and then when someone referenced an incredible long-term payoff, you complain that it took too long. He should have won at Summer Slam 2013 and remained the champion for the remainder of 2013 while he had the ENTIRE Universe behind him, but as I stated, WWE didn't execute it correctly and it all felt botched. I'm a huge Daniel Bryan mark, but having Randy Orton cash in on him was fine. It turned Orton heel, which he needed and made Bryan even more over because facing off against the Authority gets someone even more over. I agree that the Wyatt feud was thrown in and felt useless. It seemed clear that Bryan winning at WrestleMania was not always in the cards, I'll agree with you on that. But the SummerSlam 2013 finish was very well done.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 11:30:17 GMT -5
I definitely don't think Bryan winning at WM was always their plan. Fan reactions towards Batista post RR all the way through Feb cemented that IMO.
|
|
|
Post by IRS on Oct 2, 2014 11:32:44 GMT -5
"It was said this past week that even if WWE decides not to do John Cena vs. Dean Ambrose on RAW with the winner facing Seth Rollins at Hell In a Cell, they will definitely be doing a Cena vs. Ambrose feud eventually, according to PWInsider. We noted yesterday that the Cena vs. Ambrose match may actually happen as the Hell In a Cell opener, instead of RAW."
Welp, Ambrose is screwed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 12:11:28 GMT -5
He should have won at Summer Slam 2013 and remained the champion for the remainder of 2013 while he had the ENTIRE Universe behind him, but as I stated, WWE didn't execute it correctly and it all felt botched. I'm a huge Daniel Bryan mark, but having Randy Orton cash in on him was fine. It turned Orton heel, which he needed and made Bryan even more over because facing off against the Authority gets someone even more over. I agree that the Wyatt feud was thrown in and felt useless. It seemed clear that Bryan winning at WrestleMania was not always in the cards, I'll agree with you on that. But the SummerSlam 2013 finish was very well done. I agree with that too, it was pretty much a textbook MitB cash in (though I wish someone would use it to set a match up in advance rather than always trying to be cheap). If they didn't give him the strap and immediately take it away at the next PPV as well, then it wouldn't have felt so cheap because it was unique anymore. It relates to what I was talking about before, it looked like WWE was trying to cash in on that thunder that happened at Summer Slam and reproduce the shock.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 12:15:47 GMT -5
If they go with Ambrose/Cena to open HIAC, I expect a decent brawl, but then either going over Orton and Rollins would make those two look weaker. I don't like the idea.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 12:26:18 GMT -5
"It was said this past week that even if WWE decides not to do John Cena vs. Dean Ambrose on RAW with the winner facing Seth Rollins at Hell In a Cell, they will definitely be doing a Cena vs. Ambrose feud eventually, according to PWInsider. We noted yesterday that the Cena vs. Ambrose match may actually happen as the Hell In a Cell opener, instead of RAW."Welp, Ambrose is screwed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 12:29:43 GMT -5
He should have won at Summer Slam 2013 and remained the champion for the remainder of 2013 while he had the ENTIRE Universe behind him, but as I stated, WWE didn't execute it correctly and it all felt botched. Ah, I didn't realise that by building up to a payoff, you actually meant "WWE doesn't let my favourites win straight away and then every night after that as well." Again, comprehension is top notch. Never said I was sore that he lost and wasn't winning.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. McCluer on Oct 2, 2014 12:30:51 GMT -5
The problem with a poten fued is that Cena is the natural heel in this marriage.
Dean needs to come out on top of all of this if WWE wants to build top stars besides Cena.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Abed on Oct 2, 2014 12:41:30 GMT -5
I think its a really stupid idea all around. I understand they are limited since there is no Brock this time, and I'm sure Roman Reigns probably had a big role in the PPV that needed to be filled now.
(I'm pretty sure it was probably supposed to be a 6 man tag match with Ambrose/Reigns/Cena vs. Kane/Orton/Rollins in HIAC)
But no matter what way you look at it, you hurt your stars many times in one night.
Cena goes over Ambrose - Ambrose comes off looking weak Ambrose goes over Cena - Cena comes off looking extra weak
Rollins/Orton defeat Ambrose/Cena in the cell - doesnt make Rollins/Orton look any stronger going over two guys who already wrestled a match Cena/Ambrose defeat Rollins/Orton in the cell - makes Orton/Rollins look super weak being unable to beat two guys who wrestled already
They'd be better off doing one match instead of this nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Oct 2, 2014 12:57:46 GMT -5
Just do Seth/Kane/Orton vs. Ambrose/Cena in the Cell.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Oct 2, 2014 13:16:48 GMT -5
Never said I was sore that he lost and wasn't winning. You didn't hide it very well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 13:25:27 GMT -5
Never said I was sore that he lost and wasn't winning. You didn't hide it very well. OK.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 2, 2024 16:21:13 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 16:06:29 GMT -5
I feel bad for Ambrose. He is on a 747 right now and it's about to crash right into the great wall of Cena.
|
|