Mr Wrestling X

Also Orton vs Bourne on that July 2010 episode of Raw. Fairly quality television match and nothing particularly outstanding, but the RKO counter to the SSP just blew the place up and cemented the match. The timing by both those guys to make that spot work was next level stuff, it could have been an epic fail on live television too and they took a huge risk with it.

Misawa vs Kawada July 18th 2005 @ NOAH Destiny This was the last match they had together, and it was billed as such. It was a great match overall because they both got in great shape for it and were able to work a hybrid style of Classic AJPW Kings Road and the newer faster style that NOAH was getting known for from the likes of KENTA, Marifuji, etc. It was like a throwback to their classic collisions through the years and of course, Misawa was going to take the win. But the finish was a bit nuts. Misawa kicked out of the Dangeous Driver and survived multiple kicks, Kawada kicked out of the Tiger Driver 91 and the Emerald Flowsion, they went to a trade of forearms and elbows and then Misawa just pinned him for the three count. I get where they were trying to go with it - they had used everything on each other that would normally end matches, and it just came down to who had the most durable chin in the classic slugfest. But, it just didn't seem to work well for what was their final encounter. In recent years in both AJPW and NOAH the theme had been that if nothing worked, a wrestler would pull out a new move (Emerald Flowsion, Shining Wizard, etc) or a devastating, rarely-used super finisher (Burning Hammer) to decisively end a match. Kobashi really protected the Burning Hammer, saving it for significant milestone encounters in which he was going over, and this trend followed suit, it allowed for decisiveness and got the audience invested for the final move. Booker T vs Triple H March 30th 2003 @ Wrestlemania 19 Just awful. I can't tell whether this was a booking decision, Triple H being Triple H, or they got called for time and had to wrap the match early or a combination of all three. It was a really decent match until the finish. Normally in PW, the slow crawl to the pinfall is where the 2 & 3/4 kickout occurs. It didn't and just completely ruined the leading face on Raw at that point in time.

Talk of them returning to the one night WM "classic" format next year. Don't see it, there's an abundance of talent and too much money to be made from having a two night spectacular. Throw the post-Mania Raw into the mix and you'll get (assuming things go back to normal in the world) a huge surge of tourist income for host cities.

I take back everything I said about John Cena... His work from late 2013-2017 (where I think it's been established he had a degree of personal creative control and choice in who he worked with) was stellar.

I wanted to get my criticisms out of the way, whilst providing some fuel for thought. I didn't really touch upon it in my original post, but I view John Cena as being the most over personality currently in the wrestling business, both face and heel (depending on the demographic), and with that comes respect. Sure, we'd all like it to be more organised, I'd especially like it if John Cena catered to the area, being a face in some cities (and public appearances), whilst acting more heelish in other cities and playing to the negative reception he gets (Chicago, New York and Miami are places where Cena is particularly loathed). Cena's match with Lesnar last year was one of the few matches that I highly rated in 2012. What was so good about it, in particular, was Cena's sell job. He made no big superhuman comebacks, sold exclusively for 90% of the match, and did so convincingly that a great number of audience members began to cheer for him. The post-match didn't exactly help things, but the stuff with Lesnar was a highlight in Cena's wrestling career. It reminded me a lot of Ric Flair in some ways, especially when he was matched against the likes of Vader.

Whilst I'm not Mr Cena's biggest fan, I do appreciate his presence in WWE. This is a guy who has been a lifelong fan, has dedicated all aspects of his life to the business (presumably his marriage broke down in part to his schedule), and has quite possibly become the biggest ambassador for WWE in the history of the company. Furthermore, although I'm going to heavily criticise Cena's wrestling ability, I will say that given the right opponent (CM Punk and Shawn Michaels both spring to mind as opponents that Cena has never had anything less than a very good match with), he can perform stellar contests. So where does the problem lie? Well I feel the need to break this down into sections: Pure Wrestling John Cena has been a pro for well over a decade now, yet in that time, he still hasn't learned fully how to wrestle appropriately. Although most fans criticise Cena's lack of moves and innovation, it's probably a good thing that he doesn't get too innovative, given his track record at botching when he pulls unfamiliar manoeuvres out in matches. Even with his established offence, he still manages to fuck up quite extraordinarily, at Wrestlemania XXVIII for example, his sloppy execution of a diving leg drop, caused The Rock to tear a muscle. At TLC 2012, he attempted a Hurricanrana, only to completely botch the back tuck, which not even Ziggler could save upon the sell. He regularly attempts a drop kick, which he just cannot get the height for because of his sheer amount of muscle mass and compact frame (Cena's only around 6,1/6,2 believe it or not), which looks shit, especially as his opponent still has to sell it. I cringe at how recklessly Cena slams his opponents when hitting his "snap" variation of the Attitude Adjustment (the one where he doesn't bother with theatrics). Sure, they are only taking a back bump, but it could still be made safer by Cena continuing to keep hold of his opponent during the move. When Cena first started to rise up, many critics made note of how bad and uncovincing his punches looked, he still hasn't improved much upon this, although it isn't particularly necessary, since he's not in the business of heavy striking, a'la Triple H or The Undertaker. The STF (so bad it needs it's own section) John Cena comes across as the ONLY guy in the wrestling world who hasn't watched any Lou Thesz or Masahiro Chono tapes. He honestly doesn't seem to understand that the "illusion" of pressure is key to getting the move over. Thesz must spin in his grave every time Cena slaps the move on, since even a casual viewer can see that Cena has no grip applied to his opponent (who is again forced to sell the move like it's agonising, regardless). Maybe it's a problem with Cena's build, in that he cannot get a decent lock with his hands? In that case perhaps he should perform the STS (Chono's variation), in which he need only slap on a Sleeper. I speculate about this, because when Cena executes the Crippler Crossface (rarely, but he pulls it out in his "longer" matches), he doesn't seem to have as much trouble with the Crossface part, as he does when performing the STF. Wrestling 101 - The Art Of Selling Don't get me wrong, Cena knows how to sell, he just chooses not to during crucial stages when his selling (and absence of superhuman recoveries) are beneficial for telling a story (and giving his opponent credibility. The scratch-my-back/I'll-scratch-your's unwritten rule in the wrestling business, seems to be lost in this case. Far too often has Cena recovered all too quickly from his opponent's big moves or "devastating spots" (the stuff in the Nexus match at Summerslam 2010, and in the No-DQ match with Miz in 2011 were appalling). Indeed, whilst "overcoming the odds" is a big part of Cena's character, one simply cannot suspend disbelief when a wrestler simply gets up continues at regular pace, quickly after receiving a DDT on the concrete floor (Nexus 2010). It goes beyond move taking, whilst most experienced wrestlers will continue selling an injury or the impact of a move in the short term, Cena has always come across as being 100% the following day. His Raw matches have never told the story of the previous night's conflict, no matter how epic the battle. The Character This isn't all down to John Cena, since WWE creative (and Vince McMahon of course) ultimately decide the direction he takes, what kind of promos he cuts, and what direction he takes in other aspects. However, Cena has this annoying trait of adding tomfoolery into a humourless situation, be it smiling and making goofy faces as his rival cuts a resentful promo, or not stepping up to cut a serious promo himself. His pre-Royal Rumble promo on Raw most recently was dire and embarrassing. Whilst all the other main runners talked about how "important is was to get the Wrestlemania opportunity", Cena stereotyped the audience, made some rather half-assed popular culture references, and then ended the promo by essentially saying that nobody else in the Rumble mattered and that he would win (which he did). A promo like that is something a heel should be doing. So overall, where does John Cena fit in the grand scheme of all things wrestling? He's not made nearly as much of a popular culture impact as Hulk Hogan or Steve Austin did, although his popularity, be it good or bad, is on par with them from an internal-wrestling point of view. I'm starting to think that John Cena might drop out of the full-time WWE schedule, either this year or next year, in order to prolong his shelf life, since he's been working beat up for the past year, and has never taken any respectable time off, even with injuries (Cena was out for 4 months when he injured his neck, and around that same amount of time when he had to have his arm surgically repaired). It's a work ethic people can admire, but it does nothing for John Cena, if he wants to be able to wrestle matches long term (hell, Flair was part time from his mid-40's). If you look at Steve Austin, he was done by 40, having sidestepped mounting injuries and continued with the brutal WWE schedule during the height of his popularity. I'm quite confident had they negotiated a reduced date schedule (a'la Flair), that he would have got two more years out of the business. So, John Cena, under the microscope?

No shit... Although the program was incredibly half-assed in places, that I can understand people not getting it. A good (and audible) chunk of the audience were still favouring Punk, regardless of what he was saying or doing to garner heat. This is telling, in the sense that people don't like one-dimensional "classic babyface" behaviour that WWE continually books for their characters. Edit: I haven't brought up John Cena yet, that requires further discussion.

The Rock winning the WWE Championship was the right thing to do, but only because WWE had teased it (and Rock has virtually promised it for months) as part of a long term storyline which began in the build-up to Wrestlemania XXVII. I had no problems with The Rock winning the championship, but the execution of that win was completely fucking bonkers. First of all, The Rock should have gone over clean, no outside interference or screwy restarts, just a nice plain and simple one-on-one match with a clean finish. In classical wrestling fashion, the heel would finally get his comeuppance without his "safety net" (The Shield) to protect him. The match would be booked as being a much more closer contest than it was, in the sense that anybody could win (a'la Brock vs. Rock at Summerslam 2002). The rematch isn't necessary, but it gives The Rock something to do at Elimination Chamber, therefore I would have booked The Shield to run in following the match and beat down The Rock during his victory celebration. This would happen as CM Punk and Paul Heyman had gone backstage, further teasing their involvement with The Shield, but not yet confirming it. This angle would then lead into Raw the following night, where Heyman's involvement with The Shield would be confirmed, along with The Rock giving CM Punk a rematch after it's revealed that Punk didn't know about Heyman's involvement with The Shield, along with Punk making a case to The Rock about how "close the contest was". It would be stressed that Punk has fired Heyman from his employ, and that leaves the potential for Punk to reaffirm himself as a heel by re-joining Heyman (and The Shield) at Elimination Chamber to regain the WWE Championship and screw The Rock out of his Wrestlemania rematch. Vince (in his Deus Ex Vince mode - as Shoemaker coined) would come out and threaten to strip Punk, but then "have a better idea" and book a triple threat for Wrestlemania between the three men (since Taker's Wrestlemania status is up in the air again). Fantasy booking aside, it looks like the triple threat might be going ahead anyway.

This would have definitely been the case, had CM Punk not caught on in the way he did. Presumably, had Punk actually gone on hiatus from WWE (like he was planning, apparently), Cena would have feuded with Del Rio (the MITB winner) over the summer, before winning the belt back in time for the match with The Rock at Wrestlemania. I think that The Rock winning the title, with John Cena winning the Rumble, are just too predictable. Whilst I can see one of these things definitely happening, both would be overkill for a promotion with the tagline that "anything can happen in the WWE". Last year, the predictable outcome was Chris Jericho winning the Royal Rumble...

So with just over a day left until WWE's number 2 event, I still have no idea how things will turn out. The most predictable outcome is that The Rock wins the WWE Championship and John Cena wins the Royal Rumble, to set up a match between the two at Wrestlemania. Whilst this match will surely draw an astronomical figure, it would also mean WWE going back on themselves by billing last year's match as a "once in a lifetime encounter", and also putting on the same main event match two years running - something which they've never done before. No issues with a rematch, but it's still very likely that Triple H/Brock Lesnar II will also be on the card as a main event attraction, which means two rematches will be the selling point of the card. I also think it's likely that the following all stand a realistic chance of winning the Royal Rumble match: Ryback Dolph Ziggler CM Punk (should The Rock win the WWE Championship) The Rock (should CM Punk retain) Sheamus Randy Orton Thoughts? And is anyone else looking forward to the show?

Not too keen on the more recent KC stuff, it seems that they are choosing people based on reputation and the "suggestion" that they will have some juicy tales to tell, rather than their willingness to be open and just...shoot, rather than trying to play a character and make things more interesting on the spot.

I was somewhat miffed by this. From what I can gather, WWE didn't want them blading on the premier show. Naturally, this makes HIAC matches a bit harder to sell as the "ultimate violent match" when there is no colour for effect. With that, Hunter and Taker were left with putting together an "instant classic", whilst at the same time: A. Ensuring that Taker doesn't re-injure his hip or recently repaired shoulder. B. Not blading. C. Ensuring that Triple H doesn't blow his quads. D. Not performing any chairshots to the head. (regardless of whether they are protected or not) In conclusion, they both decided just to batter each other black and blue with steel chairs and hope that one, or both of them drew blood hardway (since Vince doesn't seem to have an issue explaining away hardway blood to Mattel) and compensated for the lack of big bumps and HIAC spots. Everybody knows that Punk bladed in his match with Lawler this year, I'm also fairly certain that Lesnar bladed following the "steel chain" punch from Cena at Extreme Rules (Cena was busted hardway, but there is no way that chain shot was stiff, given the potential for danger). With that in mind, I think it's safe to say that Vince is "open" to the idea of letting wrestlers bleed on rare occasions, just not at Wrestlemania. I still think the match was outstanding from a storytelling perspective.

Which really depends on the individual's idea of what constitutes as telling a story. For me, only three matches last in the past year have told a compelling story, that goes beyond the routine, albeit entertaining, storytelling in modern matches. They are: Kazuchika Okada vs. Hiroshi Tanahashi @ NJPW "The New Beginning" The Undertaker vs. Triple H @ WWE Wrestlemania 28 Brock Lesnar vs. John Cena @ WWE Extreme Rules For anybody who has seen these matches, they must surely understand why I perceive them as "great" from a storytelling perspective. They might not have been the best from a wrestling or innovation perspective, but they didn't need to be.

You win!

I've heard that Matthew Randazzo frequents (or did) DVDR, but I wouldn't class him as being "part of the business".