B2/John Cena: Do you agree with this view?

[Guest Downhome]

This isn't even MY post, I saw the following at another message board (I'm sure if you go there you saw it also), and I wanted to know what you guys thought about it, and if you feel this guy nailed it just as I do...

 

throwing this around in the head and if it's already been said (most likely it has, and by betters than myself), i apologize in advance. still, i think it bears repeating.

 

imo, what's really destroying the form we know and love isn't so much the shocking/tasteless angles we've come to know and hate. those are symptoms, rather than forms. i believe we can lay nearly all the blame at the doorstep of angle hotshotting and crash tv (sic). let me use an example to illustrate my point.

 

read a spoiler where Cena turned on Bling-Bling at the Smackdown tapings. days gone by, the turn would have taken months to germinate and the payoff would have resulted--different players notwithstanding--in some real heat for Cena and a pretty big pop for B2 (again, insert substitute workers/performers if you like, but it's a vicious cycle nowadays when booking keeps cutting folks' off at the knees). now, as we have it, you got a heel (Cena) without the benefit of any substantial backlog of motive, suspense built, animosity gained. why should he be hated? because he attacked a guy he hooked up with 2 weeks earlier?

 

conversely, why should B2 be cheered? because we really really want to see him get his revenge against a guy he started (inexplicably) jocking not that long ago? this is the **** that fosters the aimless 'shades of grey' that the wwe booking claims it's invented. you want a tweener, look up the freebirds in world class. hated the von erichs=heels and booed. issues with akbar=faces and cheered. internal logic. poor wwe-style booking weakens its own characters, cuts them off at the knees, and impoverishes viewing much more so than any specific angle.

 

thoughts?

 

...I think this is about as good as any one person could put it. Just why should ANY of us give a rats ass or a piss about B2? I know I don't, I don't even care truly about Cena enough to even BEGIN to dislike him for turning on him. There is no bond between the two, no emotional connecting between the two workers, nor with the fans for ANYONE to truly care. It just doesn't make any sense to me, that's all. Do you agree with the above as much as I do?

 

Sincerely,

...Downhome...

[Guest BobbyWhioux]

I sort of agree. I think that's a big part of it.

 

I'm of the mind that the problem is a lack of continuity in general. Splitting up tag geams after about a month is one of the manifestations of it. But the general problem is that it just doesn't seem that ANYTHING has any ramifications beyond maybe next week's show. Title reigns are so compressed, that it doesn't really matter or break your heart when your favorite face loses the title, because at worst he'll have it back in a couple of months, and likely before then. When somebody turns on somebody else, what's the big deal? They only started working together as a tag team a month ago. Contrast that with Rick Martel leaving Tito Santana to the wolves [Demolition] at Wrestlemania V, or Shawn Michaels throwing Marty Jannetty through the window just before the 1992 Royal Rumble. Strike Force and The Rockers had been tag teams for YEARS prior. Fans had gotten used to those teams, and used to supporting those teams, going through thick and thin with them, like a favorite baseball or football team. So when Martel or Michaels destroys that team and takes it away from the fans after all that time and emotional investment, and they do so in such a cowardly way, they're seen as real dickheads who deserve to be booed and hopefully some good guy will come along and kick their ass.

 

There's no continuity beyond the next PPV cycle. Once the Pay Per View comes and goes, it is as someone has pressed the reset button on history. Start over. No past. All is forgotten.

 

Remember "The Two Man Power Trip" forming just a couple months after HHH and Austin had, in kayfabe, tried to kill each other? THERE'S the problem.

 

If nothing I see is going to have any relevance in two weeks, if whatever is done tonight can and will be undone on the next show, why bother watching? And if I happen to miss a week or two of programming, I don't fall behind at all, because nothing I missed still has any bearing on what's happening when I tune back in. Nothing has the "must see" feel to it.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

Continuity is the big deal. The only--and I mean ONLY--story that has had any sort of depth/length to it lately began when Angle and Benoit faced off this summer, then formed their tag team, all of which led into the current main event storyline on Smackdown. Nothing else has lasted long at all.

 

The only tag team breakup of recent history that was at all resonant was Christian turning on Edge...though even that had almost nothing behind it, since it had been teased for so long, held off for so long, and then had no impact when it was chosen at the time. Add to the fact that the WWE let both men waddle around in lowercard hell for the months afterward, and you've got a problem.

 

Add in the fact that the tag divisions are booked horribly right now, and you have a super-shitty situation.

[Guest AfricanAmerican]

I thought Downhome didnt read spoilers..

[Guest LaParkaMarka]

Actualkly, Edwin, one other angle has lasted quite a while: the Al Wilson/Dawn Marie/Torrie Angle of Doom.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

Oh, bloody hell, I'd almost burned that from my memory after not hearing anything about it for the last week. I'll see you in hell, La Parka Marka!

[Guest Downhome]

I thought Downhome didnt read spoilers..

I don't usually, it's just that I really could care less about Cena/B2 right now, it's the only "spoiler" that I read.

[Guest jester]

That guy nailed a big part of the problem with WWE right now.

 

Wrestlers we don't care about half-heartedly doing things nobody cares about, and presenting it all like it's something we should be paying to watch.

[Guest AndrewTS]

While this seems to be a very general argument, it's also an example of a specific one: tag teams aren't seen as any sort of commitment.

 

Guys are paired up for one night, or stay together a month, and basically it's used as something for a singles wrestler to do, instead of starting a tag career. And of course the main event tag matches we got now and then. Or two top singles stars who have never or rarely teamed for EASILY winning tag titles, making it seem like tag teams are nothing more than the sum of their parts, instead of being more.

 

Part of the problem is the lack of a second tier belt. The other is that WWE doesn't give a shit about tag teams--they want to cultivate successful singles stars. As a result, any time a tag team gets over, even if long establishes, they want to tear it apart and push the half that seems over.

 

Whenever one team member is considering retiring, or a new star is NEEDED, that's fine. Booker T, HBK, and Bret Hart are examples.

 

The initial breaking of Edge and Christian and the Hardyz came as a shock. Whether it was the best thing or not is debatable. However, after the Hardyz rejoined...then Matt turned on Jeff to go to SD, it was like... "blah." No explanation was given, and there wasn't much of a shock there. It just seemed like stupid, pointless booking. Sure, it led to the Matt Hardy V. 1 character many of us know and love, but that doesn't cover up the fact that there was no real reason for the 2nd split, and that the impact is lessened since the 1st split happened not too long before it.