China Claus
Main Eventer
I can feeel your sensitivity
Joined on: Apr 17, 2012 20:05:15 GMT -5
Posts: 2,737
|
Post by China Claus on Jan 28, 2014 16:45:17 GMT -5
Unless this is all part of some huge storyline....I'd just fire Daniel Bryan. His mere presence in the company is a huge distraction. Daniel Bryan has ruined more segments that HE WASN'T EVEN IN than the WHAT chant. He's WORSE than WHAT! It's embarrassing that the hardcore mark fans are RUINING other wrestlers moments, like Batista winning the Rumble and Orton winning the Championship by chanting YES/NO and DANIEL BRYAN when Daniel Bryan isn't even IN THE SEGMENT, and those fans are also ruining WWE for those of us who are not OBSESSED with Daniel Bryan. Yeah, I like Daniel Bryan, too. I think he's a great wrestler and I enjoy his matches....but I don't go into work everyday and yell NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO! at my boss because nothing on the morning meeting agenda has anything to do with Daniel Bryan. Be a Daniel Bryan fan and when Daniel Bryan is involved in the segment, cheer for him or boo at him as much as you want...but when Daniel Bryan's segment is over, just drop it and focus on who IS in the segment. I mean, do you guys want Daniel Bryan to be on RAW for the entire 3 hours tonight? Will there be OUTRAGE if 15 minutes goes by and Daniel Bryan is not seen, heard from, or mentioned? This whole thing is really crazy. I couldn't agree more. If Daniel Bryan is going to ruin the rest of the product, I'd rather he leave. Dude you hate on the Yankees offseason moves and now Daniel Bryan, Are you serious bro?  Jk. I don't think they're "ruining" anyone's moment, no one cares about Batista and that was obvious by the lack of a pop he got at the rumble and when he returned Funny because 2 million extra people tuned in to see Batista return, and he got a great pop at the rumble. It wasn't until the butthurt marks realized that Bryan wasn't in that he started getting booed.So essentially nearly every fan in attendance at the Royal Rumble was a butthurt mark? |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 8, 2024 17:26:24 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2014 16:50:46 GMT -5
I couldn't agree more. If Daniel Bryan is going to ruin the rest of the product, I'd rather he leave. Funny because 2 million extra people tuned in to see Batista return, and he got a great pop at the rumble. It wasn't until the butthurt marks realized that Bryan wasn't in that he started getting booed.So essentially nearly every fan in attendance at the Royal Rumble was a butthurt mark? Now you're getting it. |
|
China Claus
Main Eventer
I can feeel your sensitivity
Joined on: Apr 17, 2012 20:05:15 GMT -5
Posts: 2,737
|
Post by China Claus on Jan 28, 2014 16:53:25 GMT -5
So essentially nearly every fan in attendance at the Royal Rumble was a butthurt mark? Now you're getting it. No, apparently I'm not..... |
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 28, 2014 16:58:13 GMT -5
No, apparently I'm not..... In short, people absolutely refuse to acknowledge that the portion of the fan base that resides outside the poorly defined guidelines of the "IWC" could possibly want Daniel Bryan to be competing for the Championship. You didn't know that casual fans were banned from live events for the last couple of months? Silly you. Once that ban gets lifted, we'll all realize Daniel Bryan really isn't that over and everyone will go back to not cheering for what they want to see and not booing what they don't like. |
|
|
|
Post by bigshab421 on Jan 28, 2014 16:59:37 GMT -5
'The IWC.'  Yup, because those weren't actual people at the Rumble, it was only people online who had an emotional reaction.  the whole 'IWC' concept. It's so dead and gone that it's not even funny. What does it even mean these days? When WWE spends a majority of their show promoting an app and other means of social media, which a very large portion of its audience is a part of, then where does that line even exist anymore? The "IWC" mindset isn't really a distinction of Internet vs non-Internet anymore. "IWC" is essentially just shorthand for the community of fans that hate anyone with muscles and want WWE to only push the little "workrate" guys. Not a fair statement at all. WWE ruined Ryback inside and out. He was a guy that was grown on by casual fans and alot of members online. And honestly I like Batista, and glad he came back, I just feel like they booked him into a corner and did it the wrong way. They should have called an audible for the Rumble during the title match. Face it, the guy is not being clammored for at all. Why not bring him in as a heel? Like I said, its good to have him back they just did it in a horrible way, and knowing how big of a douche Batista is, I know he is not going to handle being heckled and booed by full arenas as a face every week. Why not do the right thing and bring him back as an ass kicking heel? |
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Jan 28, 2014 17:14:56 GMT -5
Not a fair statement at all. WWE ruined Ryback inside and out. He was a guy that was grown on by casual fans and alot of members online. Ryback is actually very hated by the "IWC" stereotype fan. Perfect example of the mindset, actually. "Push a new guy!" they always say. Then Ryback gets pushed. To which they say "Not him, he has muscles! We meant a new guy who is small!" |
|
Road Warriors
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
"When we get done with you, we're going after family members boys!"
Joined on: Aug 15, 2006 15:16:34 GMT -5
Posts: 1,622
|
Post by Road Warriors on Jan 28, 2014 17:41:50 GMT -5
In all fairness I think they would like a big man with actual talent. People seem to be behind Reins and he is a muscle guy as well as Lesnar who has a world of talent over someone like Batista.
|
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 28, 2014 17:42:18 GMT -5
For me, personally, especially in the wake of WWE's social media integration and encouragement for fan interaction, the fairest description of the "IWC" is simply...
Any fan who actively engages in the in-depth discussion of the product (past, present and future) with a community and seeks to further his/her knowledge and understanding of the show beyond what is portrayed on television.
This group of fans has become far too large to simply throw a blanket stereotype over all of them and assume they like one thing and hate another. We're just a small sample of said community, and we have a huge range of differing opinions on a variety of subjects.
|
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Jan 28, 2014 18:03:31 GMT -5
that same 'iwc' some of you are trying to lump together are the same people who were originally clamoring for punk and bryan when they were in roh and elsewhere. seems like they were right.
|
|
|
|
Post by ahunter8056 on Jan 28, 2014 18:08:20 GMT -5
Unless this is all part of some huge storyline....I'd just fire Daniel Bryan. His mere presence in the company is a huge distraction. Daniel Bryan has ruined more segments that HE WASN'T EVEN IN than the WHAT chant. He's WORSE than WHAT! It's embarrassing that the hardcore mark fans are RUINING other wrestlers moments, like Batista winning the Rumble and Orton winning the Championship by chanting YES/NO and DANIEL BRYAN when Daniel Bryan isn't even IN THE SEGMENT, and those fans are also ruining WWE for those of us who are not OBSESSED with Daniel Bryan. Yeah, I like Daniel Bryan, too. I think he's a great wrestler and I enjoy his matches....but I don't go into work everyday and yell NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO! at my boss because nothing on the morning meeting agenda has anything to do with Daniel Bryan. Be a Daniel Bryan fan and when Daniel Bryan is involved in the segment, cheer for him or boo at him as much as you want...but when Daniel Bryan's segment is over, just drop it and focus on who IS in the segment. I mean, do you guys want Daniel Bryan to be on RAW for the entire 3 hours tonight? Will there be OUTRAGE if 15 minutes goes by and Daniel Bryan is not seen, heard from, or mentioned? This whole thing is really crazy. 100% agree with this. Dude you hate on the Yankees offseason moves and now Daniel Bryan, Are you serious bro? Jk. I don't think they're "ruining" anyone's moment, no one cares about Batista and that was obvious by the lack of a pop he got at the rumble and when he returned Like Lance Storm said....all those extra people didn't tune into RAW last week by accident. Clearly there is a huge interest in Batista. Batista came back and was a face. He was supposed to be the one to dethrone Orton once and for all. He should get getting MAJOR face pops. But instead, he was treated horribly and his moment was RUINED simply for NOT being Daniel Bryan. So if they have a match tonight between CM Punk and a returning ROB VAN DAM (just an example, RVD isn't back), are fans going to sit there and BOO the whole match because neither guy in the ring in Daniel Bryan? It just ruins the show for me when other wrestlers are out there busting their ass and the fans are totally not paying attention because they're belching about Daniel Bryan. It's disrespectful to everyone else on the roster who goes out there and puts their body on the line to do what they love. Once again, I 100% agree with you. It just makes no sense as to why there are so few people on this forum on the WWE board who think rationally, and they instead just want to ruin shows as well as other people's experience, as well as disrespect the other wrestlers like Cena and Orton who work their asses of, and what do they get in return for their hard work? Just morons trying to ruin the show. There is a reason why wrestling fans get such a bad reputation. Their behaviour at the Royal Rumble says it all. |
|
Joejitsu22
Main Eventer
Sexy Baked Potato
Joined on: Sept 15, 2011 8:12:28 GMT -5
Posts: 4,059
|
Post by Joejitsu22 on Jan 28, 2014 18:20:10 GMT -5
If Daniel Bryan could get until Tuesday during either of his "reigns" the crowd wouldn't be clambering for him each segment. It's the audience telling wwe who they choose. They keep pushing his character down via these story lines and the fans are rejecting. It.
|
|
|
|
Post by OverTheEdge on Jan 28, 2014 18:21:09 GMT -5
'The IWC.' Yup, because those weren't actual people at the Rumble, it was only people online who had an emotional reaction. the whole 'IWC' concept. It's so dead and gone that it's not even funny. What does it even mean these days? When WWE spends a majority of their show promoting an app and other means of social media, which a very large portion of its audience is a part of, then where does that line even exist anymore? The "IWC" mindset isn't really a distinction of Internet vs non-Internet anymore. "IWC" is essentially just shorthand for the community of fans that hate anyone with muscles and want WWE to only push the little "workrate" guys. Or it's, exactly what you've just proven it to be, a way of overgeneralizing and dismissing an opinion because it just has to be groupthink. Not any one individual could possibly feel the way you just described--it's only because they're part of the IWC that they could ever even begin to agree with such a notion. Give me a break. |
|
weaseltv
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 22, 2013 18:57:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,672
|
Post by weaseltv on Jan 28, 2014 18:25:45 GMT -5
there'e a difference in Ryback and Bryan...
Ryback was getting over really well... and they turned him heel and he's been "lost" since
Bryan was doing ok, then they turned him heel with Kane, then he became a tweener with Kane and a comedy act..
and he ran with it and got really... really popular...
whatever fans saw in Bryan that kept with him thru the past 3 years... they haven't seen in Ryback...
|
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Jan 28, 2014 18:40:45 GMT -5
Or it's, exactly what you've just proven it to be, a way of overgeneralizing and dismissing an opinion because it just has to be groupthink. Not any one individual could possibly feel the way you just described--it's only because they're part of the IWC that they could ever even begin to agree with such a notion. Give me a break. Nonsense. You can get butthurt about the dismissal, but don't get butthurt about the term itself -- these people themselves use the term. "WWE always ignores those of us in the IWC" etc. And let's be honest: Nobody here did the whole "I hate people with muscles, WWE should only push small workrate guys" gimmick until they started talking about wrestling on the Internet and somebody told them that that was the "right" opinion to have. |
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 28, 2014 18:50:57 GMT -5
Or it's, exactly what you've just proven it to be, a way of overgeneralizing and dismissing an opinion because it just has to be groupthink. Not any one individual could possibly feel the way you just described--it's only because they're part of the IWC that they could ever even begin to agree with such a notion. Give me a break. Nonsense. You can get butthurt about the dismissal, but don't get butthurt about the term itself -- these people themselves use the term. "WWE always ignores those of us in the IWC" etc. And let's be honest: Nobody here did the whole "I hate people with muscles, WWE should only push small workrate guys" gimmick until they started talking about wrestling on the Internet and somebody told them that that was the "right" opinion to have. So what do you consider yourself? Are you somehow exempt from the "IWC"? Are you that one special person who gets to spout off his opinions on the Internet and not be lumped into a ridiculously generalized stereotype? |
|
China Claus
Main Eventer
I can feeel your sensitivity
Joined on: Apr 17, 2012 20:05:15 GMT -5
Posts: 2,737
|
Post by China Claus on Jan 28, 2014 19:10:52 GMT -5
It's amazing how much debate and controversy Mr. Danielson has caused as of late.
And to think the WWE once thought he was "too bland" for their product.
EDIT: Reminds me of a certain Rattlesnake ......
|
|
|
|
Post by Lorenzo Alcazar on Jan 28, 2014 19:12:12 GMT -5
Like Lance Storm said....all those extra people didn't tune into RAW last week by accident. Clearly there is a huge interest in Batista. Batista came back and was a face. He was supposed to be the one to dethrone Orton once and for all. He should get getting MAJOR face pops. But instead, he was treated horribly and his moment was RUINED simply for NOT being Daniel Bryan. Sometimes things don't work out like they are supposed to. It was only his moment because they want to force it to be his not because people have been pining for it. If the fans want to see something give it to them don't force some old guy down our throats because he's buddies with the guy in charge and because his MMA career didn't pan out like he hoped. So until Daniel Bryan starts putting asses in seats who wouldn't be there if not for him, getting people to buy PPV's or subscribe to the WWE Network ONLY because of him, buying his merchandise in DROVES....he should not be the face of the WWE or get the Title. How exactly do you measure people buying tickets only to see him, only buying PPVs or the network because of him? You can't. You can't measure that with anyone. You can guess but there is no way to know for sure how many people bought something solely for one guy. What do you mean it was only Batista's moment because WWE tried to force it? People weren't pining for Batista? Wow. You, in one post, have in a NUTSHELL summed up EXACTLY why WWE doesn't listen to the fans. For damn near FOUR YEARS people have been bitching that they want Batista back...and he comes back and in ONE WEEK all the internet marks are already over him. You people did this to Benoit and Randy Orton back in 2004 too. Everyone wanted Chris Benoit to be the Champion. People bitched and bitched and bitched and bitched until they FINALLY put the belt on him. IMMEDIATELY everyone jumped ship and was like "Chris Benoit is an AWFUL Champion, we want RANDY ORTON! He's the FUTURE!"....so WWE puts the belt on Randy Orton, and again, IMMEDIATELY all the marks were like "he sucks, he's not ready, he's too green, we need an ESTABLISHED VETERAN CHAMPION. This happened to Zack Ryder too....the entire internet was bitching about Zack Ryder needs to get on TV and as soon as they put him in the BIGGEST STORYLINE OF THE YEAR with John Cena and Kane's return, everyone was over him. So if I'm sitting there and I'm Vince McMahon and Triple H, you know what I say to the internet? SCREW YOU! Why should I listen to you so you can immediately change your mind again? What's the guarantee that Daniel Bryan doesn't get the belt and then the fans decide somebody else is their new darling? This is why Vince McMahon and Triple H will CONTINUE to give you the show that THEY want to see, NOT the show that YOU want to see, because at the end of the day, the internet is like a bitchy girlfriend. She JUST WANTS TO COMPLAIN. She wants what she wants UNTIL YOU GIVE IT TO HER, and then she finds something else to bitch about. /end rant |
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Jan 28, 2014 19:32:44 GMT -5
Nonsense. You can get butthurt about the dismissal, but don't get butthurt about the term itself -- these people themselves use the term. "WWE always ignores those of us in the IWC" etc. And let's be honest: Nobody here did the whole "I hate people with muscles, WWE should only push small workrate guys" gimmick until they started talking about wrestling on the Internet and somebody told them that that was the "right" opinion to have. So what do you consider yourself? Are you somehow exempt from the "IWC"? Are you that one special person who gets to spout off their opinions on the Internet and not be lumped into a ridiculously generalized stereotype? I'm not crying about the term IWC. I'm not somebody that cries that WWE should do everything I say, or threatens to boycott Raw every time they don't. If my opinions fall into a stereotype, then fair enough. But if we're honest, the people who get butthurt about the term "IWC" are probably the ones whose opinions do "coincidentally" fall in line with the stereotype, but don't want to consider the fact that they might be swept up in groupthink. |
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 28, 2014 19:53:54 GMT -5
So what do you consider yourself? Are you somehow exempt from the "IWC"? Are you that one special person who gets to spout off their opinions on the Internet and not be lumped into a ridiculously generalized stereotype? I'm not crying about the term IWC. I'm not somebody that cries that WWE should do everything I say, or threatens to boycott Raw every time they don't. If my opinions fall into a stereotype, then fair enough. But if we're honest, the people who get butthurt about the term "IWC" are probably the ones whose opinions do "coincidentally" fall in line with the stereotype, but don't want to consider the fact that they might be swept up in groupthink. I don't see anyone complaining about being considered part of the "IWC", but when you make rash generalizations that coincidentally don't happen to reflect how you personally feel, that says to me that you're considering yourself to be apart from, or perhaps even above it. That's simply not the case. We're all lumped in that category of fans, whether we like it or not. Your definition was such a dramatic generalization because you attempted to define a massive community with a wealth of differing opinions into a one-track minded, brainwashed animal, so to speak. I don't think that's fair. Let's face it - in the wake of everything that's happened in the last 48 hours, we've pretty much been talking exclusively about Daniel Bryan. The battle line was drawn from the start, and it's easy to define a person's entire "schtick" just based on that alone. But the reality is that, save for a VERY select number of people, the majority of this community is far more reasonable and rationale than your theory gives them credit for. I mean, hell, I've gone to bat for Daniel Bryan since this went down. I continue to stick by my guns and say that I feel his not winning the Royal Rumble is one of the biggest mistakes I've seen as a fan in fifteen years. But hey, you know what? I also like John Cena, and Randy Orton. I think Mark Henry is ridiculously entertaining. I was a big fan of Batista at one point. We've all got some popular and unpopular opinions, and we're all from the same pool. |
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Jan 28, 2014 20:35:48 GMT -5
Your definition was such a dramatic generalization because you attempted to define a massive community with a wealth of differing opinions into a one-track minded, brainwashed animal, so to speak. I don't think that's fair. It's fine for you to not think it's fair. But if you're honest with yourself and you were on a gameshow where they asked the question "which wrestlers does the IWC want WWE to push?" and you could win a million bucks, then you would know which answers to give. Bryan, Ziggler, Cesaro, Tyson Kidd, Punk, Rollins, Ambrose. Of course there's sometimes a small bit of variation even within that kind of fan, but on the whole, they're all very similar. There are a variety of fans that post on the Internet about wrestling, but the "IWC" -- in the context of "what the IWC wants" kind of discussions -- refers to a much more narrow opinion on wrestling. And everybody knows exactly the kind of opinion it refers to. Me, I don't get upset by the term or by being included in it, because I'm secure enough that my opinions on wrestling are my own rather than something I've been dripfed by dirtsheets and forums. |
|
