|
Post by cordless2016 on Sept 20, 2016 17:28:03 GMT -5
Gosh, you Dean Ambrose fans are quite pretentious aren't you? He can't be the Steve Austin of today because fans turn on you when the next best thing comes along? Seriously?! Maybe he can't be the Steve Austin of today because he really isn't buying into his own gimmick. Austin was once in a lifetime because he was allowed to be who he really was and went against authority, which was perfect timing for the whole anti-hero movement that occured in the mid-to-late 90s. Ambrose is supposed to be a lunatic fridge (what the hell is a lunatic fringe?) yet his moveset is conventional, stupid in some cases (like his rebound lariat), and he's predictable. Yes he's booked horribly - isn't everyone? But he really didn't grow a pair of balls with this gimmick either. What's with the cutsie jokes on the mic? What's with the stupid smirks on his face? He appears to be better suited to a lone wolf gimmick, drunk and deshevelled. That's why he'd make an amazing heel. I'm ambivelant when it comes to Steve Austin, but I can't deny the power he had back in the day. Maybe there's some truth to what he's saying about Ambrose huh? Maybe taxi cab driver Sammy Zane impresses you too and he's being turned on as well? Please. I wasn't a Kevin Owens fan at all, but he won me over with solid ring work, solid mic skills, and he's owned his old-school heel gimmick. Sorry, I do admire some of you Ambrose fans and the posts you contribute around here, but you guys are as "off" with this guy as Vince is with making Roman the second coming of Cena. Funny considering it's all opinion, even...SHOCKINGLY your above opinion. I could easily make a post saying "your opinion is off" and it would mean as much as yourapost above. This is all opinion based in the end so I find it funny when someone tries passing theirs off as fact. Fans of Dean are simply pointing out the FACT that a lot of fans have turned on him in the last 6 months; not that our feelings towards him are absolutely fact and written in stone.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 20, 2016 19:14:18 GMT -5
Gosh, you Dean Ambrose fans are quite pretentious aren't you? He can't be the Steve Austin of today because fans turn on you when the next best thing comes along? Seriously?! Maybe he can't be the Steve Austin of today because he really isn't buying into his own gimmick. Austin was once in a lifetime because he was allowed to be who he really was and went against authority, which was perfect timing for the whole anti-hero movement that occured in the mid-to-late 90s. Ambrose is supposed to be a lunatic fridge (what the hell is a lunatic fringe?) yet his moveset is conventional, stupid in some cases (like his rebound lariat), and he's predictable. Yes he's booked horribly - isn't everyone? But he really didn't grow a pair of balls with this gimmick either. What's with the cutsie jokes on the mic? What's with the stupid smirks on his face? He appears to be better suited to a lone wolf gimmick, drunk and deshevelled. That's why he'd make an amazing heel. I'm ambivelant when it comes to Steve Austin, but I can't deny the power he had back in the day. Maybe there's some truth to what he's saying about Ambrose huh? Maybe taxi cab driver Sammy Zane impresses you too and he's being turned on as well? Please. I wasn't a Kevin Owens fan at all, but he won me over with solid ring work, solid mic skills, and he's owned his old-school heel gimmick. Sorry, I do admire some of you Ambrose fans and the posts you contribute around here, but you guys are as "off" with this guy as Vince is with making Roman the second coming of Cena. OK lets make one thing clear. Ambrose worked his ass off for 2 years to get where he is today while Rollins and Reigns were just giving their spots while Ambrose had to earn his. Yes Austin had power and could cherry pick everything he wanted but lets be honest what power does Ambrose have? His WM plans were shot down but Lesnar and Vince and has been booked horribly since then. Another thing if Ambrose would've been a Reign's spot during the Road to Wrestlemania it would've been epic and made more sense than Reigns. Ambrose could've been the out of control lunatic who HHH and Steph despised and wanted rid off. It writes itself and Ambrose ending the Authority at Mania would've set him up for life and we would have witnessed one hell of a title reign. This is 2016 and wrestlers have no power anymore. The bookers are the big dogs so why blame Ambrose if he has no control? Heres an example. What if MITB existed in 1998 and Austin won it instead of winning the belt at WM 14 and cashed in on some random PPV. Would that have been as special as his win at WM14?
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Sept 20, 2016 21:09:26 GMT -5
I am so tired of hearing it is the bookers fault. They may very well be part of the problem, but is ultimately up to the performer to get over with us. I don't care about stories I want to see performers busting their @$$es putting on entertaining matches. Look at Sandow he was booked like crap since his cash in loss to Cena, but everything he was handed he turned to gold. Like Bandy said I wasn't a fan of Owens when he showed up on the main roster but he won me over with his work in the ring. Ambrose has yet to do that.
I watch him and it is that cr@ppy slingshot lariat which in real life would catch nobody or those pathetic beatdowns of his where you see he pulls his punches and kicks and connects with nothing but air. Then he oversells worse than Dolph. Like before WM where he got pummeled by Brock in the garage. (Where Brock landed nothing but air also) but later in the show I was supposed to believe he stole and ambulance and drove back to the arena, but as soon as he got it to the ramp he couldn't stand or walk to the ring without constantly dropping as if he was about to pass out. And then on the pod cast he said he loves to cut his own promos and excels at them when they are just done on the spot and then proceeded to cut the worst promo I think I ever heard. I was saying for months he should be nowhere near the title as he had alot of work to do yet and if he was the champion they wouldn't be able to hide his shortcomings and from what I saw I was right.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 21, 2016 5:43:37 GMT -5
I am so tired of hearing it is the bookers fault. They may very well be part of the problem, but is ultimately up to the performer to get over with us. I don't care about stories I want to see performers busting their @$$es putting on entertaining matches. Look at Sandow he was booked like crap since his cash in loss to Cena, but everything he was handed he turned to gold. Like Bandy said I wasn't a fan of Owens when he showed up on the main roster but he won me over with his work in the ring. Ambrose has yet to do that. I watch him and it is that cr@ppy slingshot lariat which in real life would catch nobody or those pathetic beatdowns of his where you see he pulls his punches and kicks and connects with nothing but air. Then he oversells worse than Dolph. Like before WM where he got pummeled by Brock in the garage. (Where Brock landed nothing but air also) but later in the show I was supposed to believe he stole and ambulance and drove back to the arena, but as soon as he got it to the ramp he couldn't stand or walk to the ring without constantly dropping as if he was about to pass out. And then on the pod cast he said he loves to cut his own promos and excels at them when they are just done on the spot and then proceeded to cut the worst promo I think I ever heard. I was saying for months he should be nowhere near the title as he had alot of work to do yet and if he was the champion they wouldn't be able to hide his shortcomings and from what I saw I was right. Hogan, Nash and Hall were the bookers of WCW and look how it ended up and how many stars were buried. You had 2 legends like Sting and Bret Hart fighting over the US title FGS so that proves that bad bookers create bad wrestlers. Also does it really matter if his in ring work isn't great? Lance Storm and Dean Malenko were better wrestlers than Austin and Rock ever were but who was the more popular? It's the character that makes the wrestler and for 2 years people bought into Ambrose and he was getting the loudest cheers out of the whole roster. Back in April I was at a UK event and 90% of the kids were wearing Ambrose merchandise so that alone proves just how popular he was at the time. Ive even noticed a few people turning on KO aswell and the fat jokes are becoming more common so if fans really are turning on these guys then it's completely undeserving because neither have anything to warrant it.
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Sept 21, 2016 5:59:20 GMT -5
I enjoyed Sting vs Bret (Both guys are in my Top 5 all time favorite) I also enjoyed Storm and Malenko. Other than his promos I never really cared for the Rock and Austin I did like. So to me that proves nothing. Because I would rather watch Sting vs Bret or any Storm or Malenko match over any Rock match. It is all opinions and if these guys aren't entertaining their fans anymore than that is on them. It's not the fans, not the bookers not some conspiracy theory...But the wrestlers. It is their job to entertain the fans it isn't the fans job to just blindly follow them. These guys need to change things up. In Ambrose's case he needs to do away with that slingshot clothesline and learn how to throw punches/kicks that look like they actually land on their target instead of just air. Just those two things would do worlds of good for Ambrose giving him new life in between the ropes.
Also with Austin he was very entertaining as Stunning Steve in WCW he came to the WWE as the Ringmaster and was dead in the water. He knew it and he change to the Stone Cold character. Not just in name but what he did in the ring also. He wasn't complacent which is what he said to Dean. Something like He hoped Dean didn't become complacent now that he had the title, but instead pushed it.
Plus I have said this many times in the past today's fans constantly switch to the "next flavor of the month" just as soon as the guy reaches the top. There is no loyalty with today's fans like there was in the past. Today's fan mentality is "I want it now" just like with their stupid chants of "We are Awesome" which they aren't. But once "their guy" reaches the top they no longer want him there because over there is now their "new guy". So yeah it is the wrestlers who have to bust their butts every time they enter the ring to keep the fans entertained. Owens won me over with his ring work. Even Rusev won me over when he wrestled Cena at WM. I couldn't stand the guy ring work prior to that match. But now I enjoy his matches. Sandow I have said thousands of times should have been the Intercontinental Champion. But he was never given that opportunity yet all he did was entertain me every time he was performing. I don't think there was a single time he didn't entertain me.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Sept 21, 2016 6:32:07 GMT -5
I am so tired of hearing it is the bookers fault. They may very well be part of the problem, but is ultimately up to the performer to get over with us. The strange thing is how people will do the whole "blame the bookers, not the wrestler" gimmick when it's their favourites being criticised, yet they themselves will often blame/criticise/hate the likes of Cena and Reigns. Either performers have some responsibility for their performances or they don't.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 21, 2016 6:58:07 GMT -5
I enjoyed Sting vs Bret (Both guys are in my Top 5 all time favorite) I also enjoyed Storm and Malenko. Other than his promos I never really cared for the Rock and Austin I did like. So to me that proves nothing. Because I would rather watch Sting vs Bret or any Storm or Malenko match over any Rock match. It is all opinions and if these guys aren't entertaining their fans anymore than that is on them. It's not the fans, not the bookers not some conspiracy theory...But the wrestlers. It is their job to entertain the fans it isn't the fans job to just blindly follow them. These guys need to change things up. In Ambrose's case he needs to do away with that slingshot clothesline and learn how to throw punches/kicks that look like they actually land on their target instead of just air. Just those two things would do worlds of good for Ambrose giving him new life in between the ropes. Also with Austin he was very entertaining as Stunning Steve in WCW he came to the WWE as the Ringmaster and was dead in the water. He knew it and he change to the Stone Cold character. Not just in name but what he did in the ring also. He wasn't complacent which is what he said to Dean. Something like He hoped Dean didn't become complacent now that he had the title, but instead pushed it. Plus I have said this many times in the past today's fans constantly switch to the "next flavor of the month" just as soon as the guy reaches the top. There is no loyalty with today's fans like there was in the past. Today's fan mentality is "I want it now" just like with their stupid chants of "We are Awesome" which they aren't. But once "their guy" reaches the top they no longer want him there because over there is now their "new guy". So yeah it is the wrestlers who have to bust their butts every time they enter the ring to keep the fans entertained. Owens won me over with his ring work. Even Rusev won me over when he wrestled Cena at WM. I couldn't stand the guy ring work prior to that match. But now I enjoy his matches. Sandow I have said thousands of times should have been the Intercontinental Champion. But he was never given that opportunity yet all he did was entertain me every time he was performing. I don't think there was a single time he didn't entertain me.I agree. I agree with that statement.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 21, 2016 6:59:59 GMT -5
I am so tired of hearing it is the bookers fault. They may very well be part of the problem, but is ultimately up to the performer to get over with us. The strange thing is how people will do the whole "blame the bookers, not the wrestler" gimmick when it's their favourites being criticised, yet they themselves will often blame/criticise/hate the likes of Cena and Reigns. Either performers have some responsibility for their performances or they don't. Who was to blame for Sandows downfall? As far as I could see he was doing nothing wrong and entertained each and every week. Like PJ said once he lost the cash in he became a joke so the bookers were at fault with that one.
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Sept 21, 2016 7:26:39 GMT -5
Yes the bookers didn't do Sandow any favors, but he was still entertaining and the fans still over him once he stepped out from behind the curtain because he did everything he could to make it work. I can't speak for others, but for me Dean could have been booked perfectly and I don't think it would matter, because he wasn't entertaining me inside the ring. I have said this in he past I tried and tried to get behind him numerous times and I would start enjoying the match and then it would happen. He would pull out that slingshot clothesline and follow it up at some point with his catfight beatdown and it would kill anything he had done in the match to win me over.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 29, 2024 0:30:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 7:28:37 GMT -5
This is a perfect summary of why I don't like Ambrose anymore. Goofy, needless s**t like this.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Sept 21, 2016 8:18:35 GMT -5
The strange thing is how people will do the whole "blame the bookers, not the wrestler" gimmick when it's their favourites being criticised, yet they themselves will often blame/criticise/hate the likes of Cena and Reigns. Either performers have some responsibility for their performances or they don't. Who was to blame for Sandows downfall? I don't recall Sandow ever having a Wfigs downfall. People here weren't complaining about how Sandow was lazy and didn't put effort in -- on the contrary, the general feeling on Sandow was that he always gave tons of effort no matter the role. Certainly I don't recall any "are fans turning on Sandow?" threads.
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 21, 2016 11:25:32 GMT -5
Who was to blame for Sandows downfall? I don't recall Sandow ever having a Wfigs downfall. People here weren't complaining about how Sandow was lazy and didn't put effort in -- on the contrary, the general feeling on Sandow was that he always gave tons of effort no matter the role. Certainly I don't recall any "are fans turning on Sandow?" threads. No I'm talking about when they took away his gimmick and booked him as a comedy characters. No one turned on him but the WWE turned him into a joke and that was the bookers fault for wasting such great talent.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 29, 2024 0:30:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2016 13:41:01 GMT -5
I'm Still behind him, He's a great wrestler.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Sept 21, 2016 14:23:30 GMT -5
I don't recall Sandow ever having a Wfigs downfall. People here weren't complaining about how Sandow was lazy and didn't put effort in -- on the contrary, the general feeling on Sandow was that he always gave tons of effort no matter the role. Certainly I don't recall any "are fans turning on Sandow?" threads. No I'm talking about when they took away his gimmick and booked him as a comedy characters. No one turned on him In which case, it's a different issue to fans turning on someone so not sure why it was brought up.
|
|
|
Post by hbkjason on Sept 21, 2016 14:28:34 GMT -5
I have to be honest and I know people will jump down my throat for this, but that interview he did with Austin really turned me off him.... to the point where I honestly do not think I could be won back by him.
I also have to say that for the last year, year and a half, Roman Reigns has been putting on far better matches than Dean Ambrose, but people will not get behind him being champion, but they did Ambrose despite a year or more of average at best matches.
|
|
|
Post by Mox on Sept 21, 2016 14:40:22 GMT -5
This is a perfect summary of why I don't like Ambrose anymore. Goofy, needless s**t like this.
I like Ambrose, but this is embarrassing. I've said it before and I'll say it again. He needs help in the ring. He's awkward and weak in the ring and nobody backstage is saying anything.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Sept 21, 2016 14:40:54 GMT -5
I have to be honest and I know people will jump down my throat for this, but that interview he did with Austin really turned me off him.... to the point where I honestly do not think I could be won back by him. I also have to say that for the last year, year and a half, Roman Reigns has been putting on far better matches than Dean Ambrose, but people will not get behind him being champion, but they did Ambrose despite a year or more of average at best matches. Reigns has far excelled past Ambrose in general as a main event worker, but to be fair, Ambrose had a much better WWE title match with Triple H than Reigns did. None of the Shield guys are perfect, but they're all pretty damn good. I do feel like giving Ambrose the ball has exposed him as being a step or two behind Reigns and Rollins as an all-rounder as well, and yet, at times he still shows flashes of being better than both of them.
|
|
xtremebadass
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 2, 2006 19:27:32 GMT -5
Posts: 3,066
|
Post by xtremebadass on Sept 21, 2016 16:19:49 GMT -5
I often put myself in the shoes of a fan watching WWE for the first time. I try and forget everything I have seen and try and see the show from a totally different perspective.
So lets say I turn on Smackdown Live for the first time. Your perception of these performers is created by their appearance, their work in the ring, the way they talk on the microphone and ultimately how the announcers portray them through commentary. That's how I'd start to build my opinions of wrestlers.
I see Dean Ambrose come down the ramp
-Generic rock music (just an observation, it isn't swaying me one way or another, it is just generic) -Jeans and a tank top (doesn't capture my attention) -Makes goofy faces (Y DOE?) -Announcers just keep repeating he is "crazy" and a "lunatic" (I look forward to see why they say these things) -He cracks lame jokes (not helping me take him seriously -His match I am watching isn't exactly blowing me away -His finisher is a DDT (pretty meh for a finisher compared to the rest of the roster) -I think to myself why he is a crazy lunatic
This does not include any backstage segments or "hardcore" elements to any match he may have
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Sept 21, 2016 19:17:49 GMT -5
No I'm talking about when they took away his gimmick and booked him as a comedy characters. No one turned on him In which case, it's a different issue to fans turning on someone so not sure why it was brought up. Actually you did. You said fans blame the bookers when their favourite gets turned on but I was pointing out that bookers can indeed ruin a wrestler and that's why I brought up Sandow.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Sept 21, 2016 19:27:54 GMT -5
This is a perfect summary of why I don't like Ambrose anymore. Goofy, needless s**t like this. At least it makes sens that he's trying to gain more momentum. I don't understand how people can hate the rebound lariate but are fine with Taker's "Old School" or Rock's "People's Elbow."
|
|