Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted November 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 10, 2011 Is it also shit when people use "look how much merch he sells though" when defending Cena's position on top? No it isnt. He generates more money for the company through various mediums. Nothing to do with how many shirts he sells in small towns outside of America. Its because he generates sponsorship deals, licensing deals and is a special attraction draw on the big shows and a good draw throughout the rest of the dull period. Nobody else touches him. Doesn't matter if he's booed or not. He's the top man because of what he brings in. And because there is nobody in his world at the minute, the idea of him turning heel or losing his spot as the top man is unthinkable due to the dwindling business they already have. Â For as long as I can remember, the company's Top Guy always used to also be the guy that got the biggest pop of the night (every night) and the most support during his match. Cena is the first Top Guy to get a large negative reaction from a big chunk of the crowd, every time he appears and/or wrestles. Fans didn't shit on The Rock, or Hogan or Austin on a regular basis throughout their runs. Sure, there were times when their popularity dipped, but it never got to the point where fans were often cheering the Heels just as much as them. Michaels in New York got heat as a Face, but the rest of the time he was getting the reaction he's supposed to. The company's top guy is the person that draws the most money. Pops arent heat. A loud pop has never meant a thing in wrestling. WWE know this from previous experience. Austin was getting the desired heel reactions but WWF business died because the night after their biggest show ever, they lost The Rock and Austin as babyfaces. Austin was getting good heel heat, but his drawing power was damaged for good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Is it also shit when people use "look how much merch he sells though" when defending Cena's position on top? About as shit as going "it doesn't matter how much merch he sells" when whinging about Cena's position on top. Â Yeah, because that's what I just said right, and I say that all the time. Â Â Oh... Â Wait... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted November 10, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think the lessons of 2002 taught me all I needed to know about how important a pop is to the bottom line. And it's not nearly as important as people often think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think the lessons of 2002 taught me all I needed to know about how important a pop is to the bottom line. And it's not nearly as important as people often think. If you are talking about Hogan, then that's a really poor example. Â An old wrestler coming back is only ever going to make the current fans happy, and possibly give some lapsed fans a reason to tune back in for a few months. It's not going to bring millions of new, young fans in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted November 10, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 10, 2011 How is it a fucking poor example? Probably the biggest reactions for a long time in the WWF/E didn't translate to fuck all. Several times people have had large reactions and it's translated to fuck all. When did this conversation turn to brining in tons of million new fans? Actually, don't bother. I can't be fucked toing and froing for the next 90 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted November 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 10, 2011 Its a great example. Hogan came in and they did 570,000 buys on his return at No Way Out, they did 840,000 buys for his match with Rock and 400,000 buys for his match with Triple H. Then he won the belt and everyone went "fuck this". Hogan was doing well as the resident legend who they wheeled out for special attraction matches. When they made him the top man and he actually went on the road, people voted with their remote controls. Didn't matter how big the reactions were. If you watch the TV's you'd have thought Hulkamania was running wild, brother. But his title reign bombed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 About as shit as going "it doesn't matter how much merch he sells" when whinging about Cena's position on top. Â Yeah, because that's what I just said right, and I say that all the time. Â Never said you did. But if you genuinely think nobody has ever said something to the effect of "merchandise sales don't matter, Cena is shit/needs to turn heel" you've not been reading the Internet. It's a popular mong comment. Merchandise sales weren't important in the IWC criteria for judging how good a top babyface is until CM Punk shifted a few t-shirts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 How is it a fucking poor example? Probably the biggest reactions for a long time in the WWF/E didn't translate to fuck all. Several times people have had large reactions and it's translated to fuck all. When did this conversation turn to brining in tons of million new fans? Actually, don't bother. I can't be fucked toing and froing for the next 90 minutes. Â So you tell me I'm wrong, then tell me not to bother answering because you can't be arsed to debate it. Â Pretty fucking pointless you posting then really! Â Â For the benefit of anyone else who may care, why would you "ignore pops" because they don't matter? By that logic, when Cena started getting popular (and fans started to pop for his entrance and matches) WWE should have ignored it and carried on pushing Luther Reigns or whoever. Â Of course a pop matters, it's an indication of who your fanbase is most interested in. The Hogan return was always going to get pops because fans (and their Dad's) all new who Hogan was and they were happy to see him back. It was never going to lead to long-term business growth though. Â "When did the conversation turn to bringing in millions of new fans" ...when you argued that pops were not worth paying attention to, because the Hogan pops didn't lead to huge long-term business gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 About as shit as going "it doesn't matter how much merch he sells" when whinging about Cena's position on top. Â Yeah, because that's what I just said right, and I say that all the time. Â Never said you did. But if you genuinely think nobody has ever said something to the effect of "merchandise sales don't matter, Cena is shit/needs to turn heel" you've not been reading the Internet. It's a popular mong comment. Merchandise sales weren't important in the IWC criteria for judging how good a top babyface is until CM Punk shifted a few t-shirts. Â So you are arguing against your "internet fapper mongs" again, despite it not being mentioned in this threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted November 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 10, 2011 Of course a pop matters, it's an indication of who your fanbase is most interested in. The Hogan return was always going to get pops because fans (and their Dad's) all new who Hogan was and they were happy to see him back. It was never going to lead to long-term business growth though. They paid him $1.2 million in 2002 and asked him to work a number of house shows, put him in three main event matches in a row and gave him the Undistputed title, beating Triple H who'd just came back after 12 months out. Hogan wasn't there to get pops and sell foam fingers. They all bought into his bullshit and thought he had value as a draw outside the nostalgic special attraction market. Hogan wasn't given the Ric Flair run. They pushed him as the biggest thing on both Raw and Smackdown, when they should have used him like they did in 2005 and got the maximum out of what he had left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Of course a pop matters, it's an indication of who your fanbase is most interested in. The Hogan return was always going to get pops because fans (and their Dad's) all new who Hogan was and they were happy to see him back. It was never going to lead to long-term business growth though. They paid him $1.2 million in 2002 and asked him to work a number of house shows, put him in three main event matches in a row and gave him the Undistputed title, beating Triple H who'd just came back after 12 months out. Hogan wasn't there to get pops and sell foam fingers. They all bought into his bullshit and thought he had value as a draw outside the nostalgic special attraction market. Hogan wasn't given the Ric Flair run. They pushed him as the biggest thing on both Raw and Smackdown, when they should have used him like they did in 2005 and got the maximum out of what he had left. Â Â Butch brought up pops while we were talking about Punk, saying they don't matter, using the 2002 Hogan situation to make his point. Â That is a completely different situation. An old guy coming back and getting "I remember you from when i was a kid" pops is not nearly the same as a newer, younger talent starting to get big pops for the first time. Â You are completely right, Hogan shouldn't have been pushed to the very front of business, as he's an old star who should be used sparingly. Again though, that has nothing in common with the way you'd treat a new Star who just starting to get big crowd reactions. Â Rock and Austin didn't just get pushed into main events out of nowhere, they were getting super reactions (either positive or negative) on a regular basis. When the crowd gets behind someone, you push them. that's how wrestling works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted November 10, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think the lessons of 2002 taught me all I needed to know about how important a pop is to the bottom line. And it's not nearly as important as people often think.   Butch brought up pops while we were talking about Punk, saying they don't matter  THOSE SENTENCES MEAN EXACTLY THE SAME THING, OBVIOUSLY! "NOT AS MUCH" MEANS "NOT AT ALL".  I reckon that'll do me. I'm now retiring from discussion with Eddie to save my heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 So you are arguing against your "internet fapper mongs" again, despite it not being mentioned in this threat. Â Well yeah. When I'm mocking internet fapper mongs, I'll bring up the general mindset. For example, they'll make statements like "Shawn Michaels got cheered everywhere except New York" as an attack on John Cena's drawing ability, when Cena draws far more money than 90s Michaels could ever dream of. So you've defeated your own "mixed reactions means Cena sux" point by even trying to bring up Michaels as an example of a more successful top babyface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Rock and Austin didn't just get pushed into main events out of nowhere, they were getting super reactions (either positive or negative) on a regular basis. When the crowd gets behind someone, you push them. that's how wrestling works. So the top guy should probably be the one who gets the biggest reactions on a consistent basis, then? Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 So you are arguing against your "internet fapper mongs" again, despite it not being mentioned in this threat. Â Well yeah. When I'm mocking internet fapper mongs, I'll bring up the general mindset. For example, they'll make statements like "Shawn Michaels got cheered everywhere except New York" as an attack on John Cena's drawing ability, when Cena draws far more money than 90s Michaels could ever dream of. So you've defeated your own "mixed reactions means Cena sux" point by even trying to bring up Michaels as an example of a more successful top babyface. Â Where did I say Michaels was a more successful babyface? Â I didn't attack Cena's drawing ability at all, I said he gets a negative reaction, despite being a Face. Â I said that traditionally your top face is generally liked by all, not shit on by half your fans. You can't compare anyone from today's WWE to the past in a direct financial comparison because the whole shape of the industry is completely different. By your logic Jack Swagger was a better World Champ than Bret Hart because the WWE brings in more cash these days than in 1992. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.