The OAO Hate/Defend Randy Orton Thread

[Damaramu 0]

"It's not unmerited. I don't like to see the guy wrestle so therefore I do not want him on my TV. "

 

And God said, let there be a remote!

Well then I might miss something. I change the channel when Orton's on doing a promo and they have a match or entertaining segment right after! Plus if I changed the channel everytime he was on......well then I might as well not even watch the show.

Like I said before.....I'm a wrestling fan. I watch it good or bad. And as a fan I have the right to complain when something bad happens.

[Damaramu 0]

Time to defend Orton I think.

 

This is a young guy in terms of age and his time in WWE. From what he's done so far he's proven that he is charasmatic, can work the mic, can maintain a very good physique and that he can work to a good standard. He's no Benoit granted: there again neither is The Rock and he's done more for WWE in terms of entertaining and drawing than Benoit ever will. A good match or great match even doesn't always come from two technically sound workers - a brawl can be a classic too. Orton's feud with Foley is great stuff. The pay off match, if they do it, Cactus Jack vs Orton, is going to make Orton into a huge star. With so-called smart marks complaining about "the hhh effect" and "glass ceilings" I would have thought that a young, fresh and talented character like Orton would be "over" with the smark crowd.

 

He's over with me anyway.

For the last fucking time. We do want something fresh......but we want something fresh that can actually wrestle a decent match! Orton can't do that! I have yet to see 1 Randy Orton match that I was entertained by....and I've seen every match he's had on TV. Every single one. Unless this guy is burning it up on house shows that you all go to then I don't think I'm missing anything.

[Guest hunger4unger]

Why do people bother questioning why Smarks have an unnatural amount of hate for Orton? Look at the guy for Christ's sakes.

 

1. The smug, asshole smile and just that general "I'm cool" look on his face.

 

2. The stupid tattoos

 

3. The preppie clothing when he isn't in the ring

 

4. He's practically part of the "popular" people of the WWE, the clique.

 

It's very simple: the guys a jock for Christ's sake! Here we are years later, many smarks out of high school, long forgetting the Todd Martins, Chad Stevens, and Chip O'Reilly's of yesterday. The torment, the name calling, the swirlies; everyone who blindly hates on Orton is simply subconsciously having flashbacks to high school whenever they see him. The man is a varsity jacket away from being the anti-Christ... that's why everyone here hates him.

Um, he's a heel you're supposed to dislike his character traits.

[Damaramu 0]

Why do people bother questioning why Smarks have an unnatural amount of hate for Orton? Look at the guy for Christ's sakes.

 

1. The smug, asshole smile and just that general "I'm cool" look on his face.

 

2. The stupid tattoos

 

3. The preppie clothing when he isn't in the ring

 

4. He's practically part of the "popular" people of the WWE, the clique.

 

It's very simple: the guys a jock for Christ's sake! Here we are years later, many smarks out of high school, long forgetting the Todd Martins, Chad Stevens, and Chip O'Reilly's of yesterday. The torment, the name calling, the swirlies; everyone who blindly hates on Orton is simply subconsciously having flashbacks to high school whenever they see him. The man is a varsity jacket away from being the anti-Christ... that's why everyone here hates him.

Um, he's a heel you're supposed to dislike his character traits.

And on top of that.....I don't remember ever having any trouble with people like that in High School. Yeah I was picked on in grade school......but in Junior High and High School I was friends with those guys.

My High School wasn't like it is on TV.....most people were cool with everyone else. We didn't really have any bullies. And the ones that tried to be didn't really have any friends and ended up dropping out of school because nobody liked them.

[Guest Ghettoman]

For the last fucking time. We do want something fresh......but we want something fresh that can actually wrestle a decent match! Orton can't do that! I have yet to see 1 Randy Orton match that I was entertained by....and I've seen every match he's had on TV. Every single one. Unless this guy is burning it up on house shows that you all go to then I don't think I'm missing anything.

 

Yes he can. Every match he's been in has been nothing less than decent, but because you don't like him, for a reason that doesn't seem to exist, they go from nothing much to horrible.

 

He entertains me in his matches, I've liked his last four especially. His match with Hurricane was perfect for what it was, his Heat match with Venis was real good, his match with RVD was really entertaining and he showed he has a mind for what he does, and aside from the botch the tag match was fun too.

 

See if you were really all about the 'wrestling' you surely wouldn't be calling them horrible, and you surely wouldn't be watching everything Randy does. But you do, or at least follow it, which shows that you have interest in him. And if you think he's that bad, and still maintain this kind of interest in him, well then damn, he's better than even I thought.

 

Your using your opinion, one which is brought to an extreme simply for effect, as the standard at which someone should and shouldn't be pushed.

 

So please, do us a favor, don't watch what you don't like so we don't have to hear you bitch about something you detest so much you just had to sit there and watch....

[Guest hunger4unger]

Me and Ghetto agree on something...wonders never cease.

 

At least i'm free to be able to NOT laugh at your jokes here.

[Guest Ghettoman]

Oh but you will.

[Damaramu 0]

For the last fucking time. We do want something fresh......but we want something fresh that can actually wrestle a decent match! Orton can't do that! I have yet to see 1 Randy Orton match that I was entertained by....and I've seen every match he's had on TV. Every single one. Unless this guy is burning it up on house shows that you all go to then I don't think I'm missing anything.

 

Yes he can. Every match he's been in has been nothing less than decent, but because you don't like him, for a reason that doesn't seem to exist, they go from nothing much to horrible.

 

He entertains me in his matches, I've liked his last four especially. His match with Hurricane was perfect for what it was, his Heat match with Venis was real good, his match with RVD was really entertaining and he showed he has a mind for what he does, and aside from the botch the tag match was fun too.

 

See if you were really all about the 'wrestling' you surely wouldn't be calling them horrible, and you surely wouldn't be watching everything Randy does. But you do, or at least follow it, which shows that you have interest in him. And if you think he's that bad, and still maintain this kind of interest in him, well then damn, he's better than even I thought.

 

Your using your opinion, one which is brought to an extreme simply for effect, as the standard at which someone should and shouldn't be pushed.

 

So please, do us a favor, don't watch what you don't like so we don't have to hear you bitch about something you detest so much you just had to sit there and watch....

Well here you do us a favor and quit reading our posts so we don't have to listen to you bitch and moan like a little girl everytime someone says they dislike something you like.

There you go once again saying "You can't use your opinion to say that he has horrible matches! But I can use mine to say they're decent!"

IMO his matches suck ass. And I don't hate him for "whatever reason"...I hate him because he doesn't entertain me one little bit in the ring.

And yes I sit there and watch because I'm a wrestling fan for the last god damn time. What is not registering through your thick skull there? I don't know how to put it any simpler to you. I watch every wrestling show, some out of habit, but mostly because I just like to watch wrestling.....I watch bad football games to because I'm a fan of the game. I'm a fan of wrestling and I DO have the right to complain. I'm still losing where I don't have the right to complain about what I'm watching but you somehow get the right to bitch about me.

You have got to be the biggest hypocrite I've ever met. Bring some intelligence next time you try to argue with me, because right now you look like a braindead fool.

[Guest Ghettoman]

Raw's not a wrestling show, it's a television show. Therefore the excuse "I just watch wrestling" doesn't work, because your not just watching matches and critiquing them, your watching characters and how there used and critiquing them. If it's about wrestling, change the channel when a match isn't on, and then go back when you see a match on there. Simple.

 

And I'm not using my opinion to say anything is fact. I haven't said Randy Ortons matches are good or great, I've said I've enjoyed them and there not horrible, because there not. I've seen horrible wrestling, Randy was way past it during his early OVW days. To say it is obviously taking something to the extreme for the sake of your point, but really, all your doing is killing your point.

 

You keep saying "Randy Orton is a horrible wrestler" Thats not an opinion, thats a factual statement, only it's missing the fact. Saying "I'm not into Randy's matches or his character" is really the easy way out here, because it's just a declaration of your opinion.

 

But if you keep saying stuff like Randy Orton isn't over at all, and he's horrible in the ring, which are factual statements, I will continue to reply to your dumb posts.

 

How about next time, you bring a point?

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Raw's not a wrestling show, it's a television show.

 

I'm so glad they changed their named to World Television Entertainment - that "Wrestling" part was just holding them back. Using your approach, it's still a television show about wrestling and it's still a live event AND it's a television show that affects NON-televised live events (those WRESTLING SHOWS).

 

Therefore the excuse "I just watch wrestling" doesn't work, because your not just watching matches and critiquing them, your watching characters and how there used and critiquing them. If it's about wrestling, change the channel when a match isn't on, and then go back when you see a match on there. Simple.

 

How can he see a match on there if he's not watching it?

[Guest Ghettoman]

Of course, I can see Larry King is on without watching it, it's called clicking onto it, judging if whats on is something you want to watch, and then changing the channel.

 

And no, as long as the majority of the show is used to further characters and develope storylines with them, it will be a TV show. House shows, PPVs, these are advertised wrestling events. If you want to critique the WWE's wrestling product, do it based on that.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

The average in-ring time is about 45 minutes. That's more than half the show. So the "majority" of the show is used for wrestling; which, if done right, can further characters and develop storylines.

The storylines and characters, if done right, is FOR wrestling. Besides, the wrestling isn't nearly as bad as the storylines and character development - comparitively speaking.

 

Avg. Skit time is what, 1-3 minutes? Sometimes those skits go long - sometimes they go short; this effects how long they will give whatever wrestling match they're showing. If he changes the channel expecting a long promo and turns back to see a match almost over, then that's a waste.

[Guest Ghettoman]

The purpose of those shows is not to put on classic wrestling matches, but to develope characters and storylines based around one ground concept, in this case, that concept is wrestling. The matches they build to occur at actual wrestling events, otherwise there used as a ratings grabber. The basis of it all is wrestling, what happens around the wrestling is pure TV show.

 

But it's still a television show, just like Survivor, which is more TV show than it is survival competition. This is why I laugh when I here someone say "the latest ROH show was soooo much better than Raw" as if there was a point of comparison to begin with.

[Guest Ghettoman]

"If he changes the channel expecting a long promo and turns back to see a match almost over, then that's a waste. "

 

Well now your selling him short, the product is predictable and stale right? Well then what are the chances of being suprised to the point where you think a promo is on but a match is instead?

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

The purpose of those shows is not to put on classic wrestling matches, but to develope characters and storylines based around one ground concept, in this case, that concept is wrestling.

 

If its purpose was to develop characters and storylines then they would hire actors. E.R. didn't hire actual doctors and Law and Order did not hire actual cops and lawyers; character development and storylines are significant, however wrestling is an integral part to the shows and it always has been.

 

The matches they build to occur at actual wrestling events, otherwise there used as a ratings grabber. The basis of it all is wrestling, what happens around the wrestling is pure TV show.

 

"Pure TV show"??? WTF does that even mean? Monday Night Football is on TV thus making it a TV show. They aren't purely Football as they spice it up by having pregame shows, half-time analysis, announcers, fun graphics, etc. They bread and butter, however, is the FOOTBALL. RAW (and wrestling) is a mock sport; they have announcers, they have titles, they have wins and loses, they have competition, it is much closer to football than it is to "Pure TV" like Friends. I understand what you're saying by telling Dama not to judge Orton's matches by TV - I think Orton is an ok wrestler and doesn't suck - but I disagree with the notion that you can't judge TV matches because they are on TV and therefore have different objectives. If they had different objectives, then they wouldn't do it in-ring.

 

But it's still a television show, just like Survivor, which is more TV show than it is survival competition. This is why I laugh when I here someone say "the latest ROH show was soooo much better than Raw" as if there was a point of comparison to begin with.

 

Raw had 88 minutes to put on a good show. The WWE decides to use their time to put on a bad show. RAW is a live show which charges, what, 40 bucks per ticket (avg)? They have 2 hours to put on a good show for that live crowd. The WWE decides to use their time to put on a bad show. They have the same objective; to put on a good show (well, they should). Their methods might be different, but the objective is the same. If RAW fails and ROH succeeds in achieving their objectives, the the comparison is valid.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Well now your selling him short, the product is predictable and stale right? Well then what are the chances of being suprised to the point where you think a promo is on but a match is instead?

 

*Laughs at the irony*

 

While the storylines and match outcomes are foreseeable, the format itself as well as match/promo/skit placement cannot be predicted. Naturally, you're taking his words too literal (despite knowing what his intention was) in hopes of proving a point. The point has been made, but it's not the one you wanted.

[Guest Ghettoman]

No they hired writers.

 

And comparing it to MNF would work if you used a PPV. Comparing Raw to NFL Live or a show like that would be more logical.

 

And my point wasn't judge a specific worker by Raw matches, a worker can be judged by any match in one way or another, my point was don't tell me the WWE never puts on any good wrestling matches simply because there wasn't one on Raw.

 

Raw's objective is to further the stories characters are involved in, an ROH event's objective is to put on a great card of wrestling matches. So I'd say the comparison isn't valid.

 

Like I said, if it were PPV's and house shows people were critiquing, fair game, thats a product you pay to see, it's a transaction of money for a service. A TV show doesn't work the same way, you don't get charged 5 dollars for watching Raw, you don't get an announced card the second you turn on the show.

 

It's completely and totally a television show, which is one goal Vince has reached. Now all he needs is for people to view it as such.

[Guest Ghettoman]

"While the storylines and match outcomes are foreseeable, the format itself as well as match/promo/skit placement cannot be predicted. Naturally, you're taking his words too literal (despite knowing what his intention was) in hopes of proving a point. The point has been made, but it's not the one you wanted. "

 

No, it can be monitered easily by flipping to the channel when you want to. And really if the WWE is that predictable, how are you gonna see a promo, and not no where it's going? If it's going to a match, you'll realize that, if it's not, you'll realize that too. Simple really, all you need is a brain and remote and the WWE becomes miraculously enjoyable.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

No they hired writers.

 

MNF doesn't have writers?

 

And comparing it to MNF would work if you used a PPV. Comparing Raw to NFL Live or a show like that would be more logical.

 

MNF is on TV, you don't have to pay to see MNF (aside from the cable bill - which is the same RAW).

 

And my point wasn't judge a specific worker by Raw matches, a worker can be judged by any match in one way or another, my point was don't tell me the WWE never puts on any good wrestling matches simply because there wasn't one on Raw.

 

If they're not putting on good wrestling matches, they're not putting on good wrestling matches. RAW *especially*.

 

Raw's objective is to further the stories characters are involved in, an ROH event's objective is to put on a great card of wrestling matches. So I'd say the comparison isn't valid.

 

If the objective is to further stories then why do wrestling at all? Why dedicate more than half the show to it? The objective of ANY show should be to be "good" - the WWE is a wrestling show, despite it being on TV, just as MNF is a football show. If they aren't putting out good wrestling then they've failed.

 

Like I said, if it were PPV's and house shows people were critiquing, fair game, thats a product you pay to see, it's a transaction of money for a service. A TV show doesn't work the same way, you don't get charged 5 dollars for watching Raw, you don't get an announced card the second you turn on the show.

 

So critiquing wrestling on a show about wrestling that features wrestling matches is somehow wrong because the show about wrestling isn't really about wrestling... despite there being wrestling on the show??

 

It's completely and totally a television show, which is one goal Vince has reached. Now all he needs is for people to view it as such.

 

Yeah, cause then maybe they'd see it's a bad television show...

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

No, it can be monitered easily by flipping to the channel when you want to. And really if the WWE is that predictable, how are you gonna see a promo, and not no where it's going? If it's going to a match, you'll realize that, if it's not, you'll realize that too. Simple really, all you need is a brain and remote and the WWE becomes miraculously enjoyable.

 

Funny, you promote using a brain when getting around the show, but you don't promote it when watching the show. There's a difference between knowing where a promo is going and how long it's going to be.

[Guest Ghettoman]

No, MNF doesn't have people scripting what happens during the game.

 

MNF is an advertised event, which guarantees a game between two teams. Thats what a PPV is, only it's like your getting 10 games. Raw would be those players talking about the game, what there going to do in that game, having things happen that build a story into the game. It's like an NFL live, the only difference is matches are used to further those stories at times, which would be like Salsbury and Berman getting on there fake field to show what could or will happen.

 

My point about Raw was you can't use something not presented as a wrestling event in comparison to something that was. Raw didn't advertise a card for a month, ROH did. There's clear differences between them, mainly that one is a tv show and the other is a wrestling event, that make comparing them as if they were the same wrong. If your judging the WWE's total product, PPV's included, then it's fair game, because your no longer comparing a pencil to a pencil sharpener.

 

And they do wrestling because it's used to further those stories. Now and then you get an advertised conclusion match, but not often enough to negate what happens the rest of the time and show, and aside from 1 or 2 matches here and there, even the advertised conclusion matches are used to further a story.

 

If I see someone throw a football on a sitcom about a former football player, I'm not watching a football game. Raw and SD are the same way, the wrestling is simply an element used as a basis for everything and a story teller.

 

And I'm not arguing the quality of what it is, simple what it is.

[Guest Ghettoman]

"There's a difference between knowing where a promo is going and how long it's going to be. "

 

Not much, and that still doesn't make it impossible to turn back and forth.

[Damaramu 0]

Until they take "wrestling" out of the name and they don't have a ring in the arena and it becomes purely backstage segments then I will watch for wrestling because no matter how much you insist it's not....it IS a wrestling show. Therefore I am watching it for wrestling. And yes I do like to see storylines at times.....GOOD storylines that don't take up the majority of the show.

Guess what? I don't like Randy Orton's matches, I don't like his storylines, and I don't like his promos! So guess what I'm going to do? As a fan I'm going to complain that I'm not being satisfied! And you know what you can do about it? Nothing!

I just find it so hilarious that guys like you get on here and argue that we shouldn't complain but all you do is complain about us complaining. Wow.....you are a hypocrite.

[Guest Ghettoman]

The only thing I complained about was the trend, and simply debated what you were saying. I wasn't saying you should change your viewing habits, simply questioning and suggesting something better. And I can do something, debate what you say, like I just did. Discuss, debate, welcome to the world of wrestling forums.

 

No need to get all defensive and act like you see just how lame what your saying and doing is, but can't take the ego blow so you go into overdrive. That just looks bad.

[JoeDirt 0]

WHO FUCKING CARES? JESUS CHRIST!

 

It's obvious they're going to keep pushing him, whether you like it or not. So stop attacking/defending him and just watch the fucking shows!!!

[Guest Ghettoman]

Keep on keepin' on Joe Dirt, I agree.

 

It's just easy to get frustrated when his name is in every thread.

[Damaramu 0]

No...I don't think I'll stop. If I see something I don't like on my TV I'll vent it here. Sorry.

[Damaramu 0]

The only thing I complained about was the trend, and simply debated what you were saying. I wasn't saying you should change your viewing habits, simply questioning and suggesting something better. And I can do something, debate what you say, like I just did. Discuss, debate, welcome to the world of wrestling forums.

 

No need to get all defensive and act like you see just how lame what your saying and doing is, but can't take the ego blow so you go into overdrive. That just looks bad.

No I explained my stance and how it wasn't going to change and you kept pushing your point and trying to tell me how there was a problem with mine. And my stance still isn't going to change.

[Guest Ghettoman]

I didn't tell you to change your stance, I simply questioned it and suggested something else.

 

But yeah, your overly defensive nature has made it clear my point was made.

[Damaramu 0]

I didn't tell you to change your stance, I simply questioned it and suggested something else.

 

But yeah, your overly defensive nature has made it clear my point was made.

Nah.......you questioned it and I told you it wasn't changing and you continued to question it. You only needed to question it once before you moved on.

And my point has been made that you only disagree to disagree as evidenced in HD.