|
Anti-faces maybe?
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
sticklefifer posted:I'm still 100% convinced that the gist of this conversation basically happened: You never air the dirty laundry because then if Punk decides a few months later he wants to come back you can declare it was a work all along and come up with a story for it. The long con, every drat one of you were made fools of. Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 22:50 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:You beat up a guy that gets beat up all the time, that makes you an rear end in a top hat. You beat up a bully, the bully got what they deserve. Ah I see what you're saying. I'm hoping for a Sheamus/Byan feud, and if the company considers Sheamus heel at this point they might be going in that direction, but Sheamus still feels like a midcarder right now and none of the midcard guys have much personality either way. You're right, Sheamus beating Ambrose that way doesn't make him a heel.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Yes, so the Shield beating up HHH and Evolution makes them babyfaces. Right, but not sympathetic babyfaces, i.e. you cheer the guy because he keeps getting screwed by the heel in lovely ways and you want to see him get his revenge.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Yes, so the Shield beating up HHH and Evolution makes them babyfaces. I'm just saying I don't know if the audience at large sees the Shield as someone that has been screwed with by management (Evolution) all that much. And when they did, they beat them all up before they could do anything including a guy who doesn't even wrestle. It also doesn't help that Sheamus won it in a fair fight with no shenanigans. While the Battle Royal stacked the odds against Ambrose, he didn't even get ganged up on in the Battle Royal. He just lost like anyone else would. And stacking upon that with BlueArmyMan, that's part of the problem with "the new kayfabe." I have no perception management doesn't actually like the Shield. I know they do. It's not the same way with Bryan, which is why I feel it worked/works so well. Daniel Bryan fucked around with this message at 22:56 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
PunkBoy posted:JBL puts over everyone that isn't Rey Mysterio. he does the Jesse Ventura method of admitting their skill but always dumping on them personally, which is a perfectly legitimate heel commentator tactic. except with cena, when it's not just about his wrestling ability but also what a great guy he is and how the wwe universe loves him
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:You beat up a guy that gets beat up all the time, that makes you an rear end in a top hat. You beat up a bully, the bully got what they deserve. If you always win fair fights, people love you. It is sometimes risky when they have the Shield beating people up 3 on 1, but no one is going to hate them for beating Evolution or anyone 3 on 3 or 1 on 1.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
The Shield debuted as a strong, well-protected heel stable that could beat their opponents, even top guys like Cena, so I'm glad the face turn presents them as exactly the same for the most part.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Ambrose looked pretty strong, he had around 6-7 eliminations from what I remember. And Sheamus is credible as a main-event threat, it's not really damaging to lose clean to him, or is it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:If you always win fair fights, people love you. It is sometimes risky when they have the Shield beating people up 3 on 1, but no one is going to hate them for beating Evolution or anyone 3 on 3 or 1 on 1. Yes but rarely are the Shield "gotten to" is what I mean. Ambrose lost a meaningless title he basically never defended. Whoopie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Supreme Allah posted:And Sheamus is credible as a main-event threat, it's not really damaging to lose clean to him, or is it. Definitely not. There was nothing in the match to suggest a heel turn. Of course a wrestler would hit his finisher before attempting to win the match. If they're really claiming this is a heel turn they need to do more work to cement the turn. The most surprising thing was strapping a midcard title on Sheamus.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:Yes but rarely are the Shield "gotten to" is what I mean. Ambrose lost a meaningless title he basically never defended. Whoopie. You don't have to be. Reigns especially. Goldberg got big because he was the superman rear end kicker everyone wants to be at some point in their life when they feel vulnerable or afraid.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Blasmeister posted:Haha what? Never listen to anything the poster Daniel Bryan says unless it's a quote from Meltzer, which is basically 95% of his posts. It's not hard to filter out his horrible opinions.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Yes but it's not 1998 anymore so the shelf-life on that is going to be significantly lower than ever before. A guy never loses, eventually people just want to see the guy lose.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Fair to Midland posted:Never listen to anything the poster Daniel Bryan says unless it's a quote from Meltzer, which is basically 95% of his posts. It's not hard to filter out his horrible opinions. His opinions are no better or worse than most people on this forum.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
I almost always say "I think" when I say something that is just my opinion. You're allowed to disagree. It's fun!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:His opinions are no better or worse than most people on this forum. Running to his aid is wrestling "insider" #2. e: I'd say #1 but usually DB beats you to the Meltzer copy pastes. e2: I'm typing this while seeing on my other screen the Legends House members with waxed chests jiggling all over. Go Wrestling. Fair to Midland fucked around with this message at 23:21 on May 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
I don't really know what's objectionable about someone saying "The Shield are not traditional underdog babyfaces"MassRafTer posted:His opinions are no better or worse than most people on this forum. how good are my opinions, mrt?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
oatgan posted:I don't really know what's objectionable about someone saying "The Shield are not traditional underdog babyfaces" 98th percentile.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
The Shield is what happens if Austin cloned himself twice and formed a stable
|
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:98th percentile. what about mine? Judge meeeeee.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
Stallion Cabana posted:what about mine? My judgement of you.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
I'd say most posters in here are a solid B+.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
Fair to Midland posted:Running to his aid is wrestling "insider" #2. Boy, you really hate Dave for some reason
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:41
|
|
SAVE_US.CHR
|
ChampRamp posted:Boy, you really hate Dave for some reason He's just another mark, brother. *rips up won on ppv*
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:Yes but it's not 1998 anymore so the shelf-life on that is going to be significantly lower than ever before. A guy never loses, eventually people just want to see the guy lose. As long as there's stakes the crowd can believe in, you can have a dominant babyface. The problem with a guy like John Cena isn't that he's dominant, it's that there's no stakes. After a match, Cena looks and acts exactly the same. If he wins, rapadoo. If he loses, it doesn't matter because he's above it all. With The Shield, they're dominant but they almost always have a hard fought match, you can believe that there's a chance they'll lose and they look exhausted at the end of their matches. (It also doesn't help that the WWE seems to think that turning a person babyface means stripping them of any character and making them super bland)
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
I like me.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:Yes but it's not 1998 anymore so the shelf-life on that is going to be significantly lower than ever before. A guy never loses, eventually people just want to see the guy lose. I don't see why it would be. It worked with Ryback and they didn't handle his jobber squash push very well. If Reigns can't go in the ring for his role, then it won't work. If he can go at the level of even Batista in 2005 he'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:As long as there's stakes the crowd can believe in, you can have a dominant babyface. Right. Which is why they're working as babyfaces. I was just telling people why beating them up isn't going to get much heat because there isn't much sympathy in their characters. MassRafTer posted:I don't see why it would be. It worked with Ryback and they didn't handle his jobber squash push very well. If Reigns can't go in the ring for his role, then it won't work. If he can go at the level of even Batista in 2005 he'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:With The Shield, they're dominant but they almost always have a hard fought match, you can believe that there's a chance they'll lose and they look exhausted at the end of their matches. ...are we allowed to admit we watched Smackdown early in this thread? Cause Smackdown tonight is real good.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
oatgan posted:I don't really know what's objectionable about someone saying "The Shield are not traditional underdog babyfaces" Underdogs? No. But saying you can't sympathise with the cool dudes being hosed about by the bad guys trying to stop them going around and being awesome seems pretty far from reality. They're popular and over as faces at this point, the crowd reactions make this obvious. And Ambrose is the guy that takes the majority of the heat in their matches and was picked on especially by the Authority with the 4-way on Smackdown and now the battle royal days later trying to get petty revenge by taking his title away. I don't see how it's a hard storyline to follow and how you can think that him losing to Shaemus after getting so close to defying the odds isn't supposed to make you mad at Shaemus for helping the Authority get their way.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
as a side note I hope Sheamus's gimmick going forward is "fucks over internet darlings" because between the battle royal and 18 Seconds he could kill in front of the right crowd
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
thank you for your kind words xoxo V thank you for your kind words xoxo Stallion Cabana fucked around with this message at 00:22 on May 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
Stallion Cabana posted:what about mine? I saw you posting in a Men Drinkin' Coffee LP so that's 99th percentile material if I ever saw it.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Hey guys! Vince Russo has a new website! http://www.pyroandballyhoo.com/. What does the ture genius of pro wrestling have to say!Vince Russo posted:IS NOTHING SACRED ANYMORE?!!! BigRed0427 fucked around with this message at 00:39 on May 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
I personally enjoy the fact that the Shield have kept their personalities largely intact, aren't the typical WWE faces cutting stilted pandering promos, and are pretty much the same dudes only they're beating up people who are bigger assholes than them now.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Blasmeister posted:And Ambrose is the guy that takes the majority of the heat in their matches and was picked on especially by the Authority with the 4-way on Smackdown and now the battle royal days later trying to get petty revenge by taking his title away. I don't see how it's a hard storyline to follow and how you can think that him losing to Shaemus after getting so close to defying the odds isn't supposed to make you mad at Shaemus for helping the Authority get their way. Ambrose getting the most damaged really makes him my favourite member of The Shield. I know Rollins get beat up a lot too, but people beating down Ambrose really sticks in my head for some reason. The Wyatts/Shield match at Main Event on April 8th, for example, features tons of the three Wyatts beating up on poor Ambrose, which makes the end just that much sweeter. Rollin's balcony dive really makes me want to reconsider, though...
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Thauros posted:I personally enjoy the fact that the Shield have kept their personalities largely intact, aren't the typical WWE faces cutting stilted pandering promos, and are pretty much the same dudes only they're beating up people who are bigger assholes than them now. One of the reasons the Attitude Era is thought of so fondly, despite a lot of the stuff in it aging really poorly, is it was the first time the WWE really started letting heels-turned-faces do this. In my opinion.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
Fair to Midland posted:Running to his aid is wrestling "insider" #2. People are gonna give you poo poo but you aren't wrong - have to wait for the official star ratings on those posts before I can really tell for sure though
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
Mr. Carlisle posted:People are gonna give you poo poo but you aren't wrong - have to wait for the official star ratings on those posts before I can really tell for sure though Keep it up, eventually if you keep repeating yourself it will happen.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 00:57
|
|