|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 0:25:17 GMT -5
Saw this on the ROH boards, it's from Lords of Pain:
"Yeah, I went there. I mean seriously think about it? Basically if you’re the champ it says you’re the best at what you do which is wrestle for about 60 overweight cyber**** who get off thinking about hour long gauntlet matches that end in a draw. So basically you suck but just not quite as bad as everyone else does.
Holding this title will give you instant credibility. However, if you ever want to make any money this wont be the type of credibility you will want. You’ll become instantly popular with a bunch of fans who are about 2 and a half shots of Jack away from being…well ill let you use your imagination.
The title has been around for almost 6 years now and there have only been 10 champions. Just like most useless titles in wrestling it takes itself too seriously. There has never been a 2 time ROH World Champion. Thank god for that, I don’t think the worlds ready for a 2 time ROH World Champion yet. Title holders typically have long championship reigns that are suppose to make the title more prestigious. However, what this usually results in is boring predictable results. I mean who wants to know the outcome of the match before it happens?
The biggest problem with this title is that it pretty much ruins everybody’s career that it touches. While it creates a fan base for them, usually the fan base becomes so annoying that when the wrestler moves on to bigger and better things they are hyped up as the best wrestler in the world. The fans of the wrestler becomes so enamored with themselves that you just cant help but root against the guy at all costs. This attitude streams from the fans to the wrestler themselves. They start to buy there own hype which goes on to lead into a huge ego that they can’t back up in the ring.
Don’t worry though, like all the other titles I have talked about today this title does have some importance. Without the ROH World Title, there would be nobody for the typical “WWE is the suxor!X!$#^!” fan to look up to. With the ROH world title out there, it will always give that guy who thinks it’s cool to be against anything mainstream something to wake up for in the morning. It will also create a bunch of new wrestling fans who think they are wrestling elitist because they will live and die ROH. When in reality, there just rooting for a bunch of nobody’s who aren’t good enough to make it to the big time. It’s sad but true which is why the ROH World Title is the most useless title in all of wrestling."
This guy is 100% right, and anyone who doesn't see it is completely blind.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Feb 23, 2008 0:30:05 GMT -5
Saw this on the ROH boards, it's from Lords of Pain: "Yeah, I went there. I mean seriously think about it? Basically if you’re the champ it says you’re the best at what you do which is wrestle for about 60 overweight cyber**** who get off thinking about hour long gauntlet matches that end in a draw. So basically you suck but just not quite as bad as everyone else does. Holding this title will give you instant credibility. However, if you ever want to make any money this wont be the type of credibility you will want. You’ll become instantly popular with a bunch of fans who are about 2 and a half shots of Jack away from being…well ill let you use your imagination. The title has been around for almost 6 years now and there have only been 10 champions. Just like most useless titles in wrestling it takes itself too seriously. There has never been a 2 time ROH World Champion. Thank god for that, I don’t think the worlds ready for a 2 time ROH World Champion yet. Title holders typically have long championship reigns that are suppose to make the title more prestigious. However, what this usually results in is boring predictable results. I mean who wants to know the outcome of the match before it happens? The biggest problem with this title is that it pretty much ruins everybody’s career that it touches. While it creates a fan base for them, usually the fan base becomes so annoying that when the wrestler moves on to bigger and better things they are hyped up as the best wrestler in the world. The fans of the wrestler becomes so enamored with themselves that you just cant help but root against the guy at all costs. This attitude streams from the fans to the wrestler themselves. They start to buy there own hype which goes on to lead into a huge ego that they can’t back up in the ring. Don’t worry though, like all the other titles I have talked about today this title does have some importance. Without the ROH World Title, there would be nobody for the typical “WWE is the suxor!X!$#^!” fan to look up to. With the ROH world title out there, it will always give that guy who thinks it’s cool to be against anything mainstream something to wake up for in the morning. It will also create a bunch of new wrestling fans who think they are wrestling elitist because they will live and die ROH. When in reality, there just rooting for a bunch of nobody’s who aren’t good enough to make it to the big time. It’s sad but true which is why the ROH World Title is the most useless title in all of wrestling." This guy is 100% right, and anyone who doesn't see it is completely blind. Call me blind! People turned on Punk not b/c he went to the E. Not because he was ROH champion. They turned on him, cuz he doesnt wrestle the same style anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 0:32:00 GMT -5
Punk is probably the exception to that, honestly.
|
|
|
|
Post by lariato on Feb 23, 2008 0:33:31 GMT -5
I think this brings up some great points, and personally, I think whoever wrote this has a good head on their shoulders for making such valid points, good for them for pointing all this out.
|
|
|
|
Post by jake_317 on Feb 23, 2008 1:06:51 GMT -5
I tihnk he makes some good point, but he is quite contradictory. I love how he finds a use and an outlet to complain about a useless title.
...and Joe? He's got problay ten times the fan base he had when he was ROH champion. Danielson, has it really hurt his career?
I love how everyone loves to play crtic these days. I would like one person to name a title that is worth more than the ROH championship in America, excluding the obvious ones (WWE/TNA) and the NWA title, that is worth more than the ROH title. Hell, the ROH Title has more name value in alot of places than the NWA title.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ultimate Figure Collector on Feb 23, 2008 1:30:02 GMT -5
The ROH Title is nothing more than an indy title that shows who the top guy in ROH is. The ROH Title will never mean as much as the WWE Title, WCW Title, NWA Title, ECW Title or TNA Title no matter how many so called 5 star matches they put on and no matter how many countrys they defend it in. ROH might look like they have a large fan base but it in reality is very small. It's just an internet fan base which isn't large to begin with and even a lot of the internet fan base doesn't watch it. The ROH Title is nowhere near the most meaningful title in wrestling. It's just an indy title. Until they get a TV deal, become successful on PPV, get an action figure deal, DVD's in stores(not just two I mean every show) then the title will mean something to people. I do agree that 95% of the ROH Title matches are predictable no matter how many times the people over at the ROH board try to sell you on someone pulling out an upset.
However this guy is a tool to say that because you work for ROH you aren't "good enough for the big time". Everyone starts somewhere and we all know how WWE feels about talented guys. As a fan of these guys or less you are sucking Triple H, Shawn Michaels or Undertaker or Vince's dick you aren't gonna get anywhere in the WWE. You also have to at least be 6'4 and inject steroids into your body so that you are dead before 45.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 2:24:34 GMT -5
The ROH Title is nothing more than an indy title that shows who the top guy in ROH is. The ROH Title will never mean as much as the WWE Title, WCW Title, NWA Title, ECW Title or TNA Title no matter how many so called 5 star matches they put on and no matter how many countrys they defend it in. ROH might look like they have a large fan base but it in reality is very small. It's just an internet fan base which isn't large to begin with and even a lot of the internet fan base doesn't watch it. The ROH Title is nowhere near the most meaningful title in wrestling. It's just an indy title. Until they get a TV deal, become successful on PPV, get an action figure deal, DVD's in stores(not just two I mean every show) then the title will mean something to people. I do agree that 95% of the ROH Title matches are predictable no matter how many times the people over at the ROH board try to sell you on someone pulling out an upset. However this guy is a tool to say that because you work for ROH you aren't "good enough for the big time". Everyone starts somewhere and we all know how WWE feels about talented guys. As a fan of these guys or less you are sucking Triple H, Shawn Michaels or Undertaker or Vince's dick you aren't gonna get anywhere in the WWE. You also have to at least be 6'4 and inject steroids into your body so that you are dead before 45. Well, if that last sentence is true (Which Bret Hart proves it's not, but that's a story for another time), I'm at least half qualified to get somewhere in WWE. |
|
Too Sweet
Main Eventer
R.I.P MJ
Joined on: Sept 20, 2006 23:28:07 GMT -5
Posts: 3,611
|
Post by Too Sweet on Feb 23, 2008 2:36:03 GMT -5
Punk wanted to be more successful, hence why we went to the WWE, He'll be way more Known, Travel Around the World and Make much more money than he did before, why would Punk want to make less so he can make you fans happy? He has way more fans than he ever did now and He's actually alot better off than before whether you fans like it or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Swarm on Feb 23, 2008 2:40:19 GMT -5
I think you all are missing a key point here..
It's a WORK.
I mean jesus christ, it's fake. The outcomes are pre-determined! I pity the person who put the time in to write that nonsensical garbage, as they obviously have more invested in this than the "50 overweight cybershit" he's ranting against.
But hey, I'll give the benefit of the doubt, let's say it's all real right? This guy says that titles are worthless because of predictable outcomes. Well, by default, TNA and WWE's Titles are worthless as you can get spoilers for their shows days, sometimes weeks in advance. Also, the WWE Championships haven't had a significant, clean victory in years. Is that value? The TNA Title hasn't had a single clean title defense. Is that value? The NWA Title has been thrown in more trashcans than the WCW Television Title. Is that value?
I don't put up for ROH so much nowadays because, honestly, I don't like their current product, but why would long title reigns mean less value? It's one thing to have a title for a long time without any important title defenses or matches (Triple H in 2003, for example). It's another when you do. Look at Joe's reign in 04. If the archive goes back that far, you can look at the ROH Message Boards when he was having a semi-main event title match with Trent Acid where people were sure that this was going to be the night he lost. That is value, when a title match against a meaningless opponent actually matters. Can you seriously name one title match in the past five years for the WWE or TNA that mattered? I can think of maybe two.
As for it ruining careers, kind of a ridiculous argument. Low Ki's got a contract with New Japan, Joe's got a contract with TNA, Aries was being pushed hard in TNA and now in ROH, Punk and Gibson have WWE deals, Danielson is a main eventer in ROH, Homicide's got a TNA deal, Morishima is a rising star in Japan, and McGuiness is an ROH main eventer as well. Hell the only guy who's career has suffered since was Xavier, and his entire title reign was built off the fact that he was a chump anyway.
Honestly, I'm almost certain the person who wrote this was just trying to push buttons, which it worked. I'm more responding to the people who actually agreed with this nonsense.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 13:29:21 GMT -5
I think you all are missing a key point here.. It's a WORK. I mean jesus christ, it's fake. The outcomes are pre-determined! I pity the person who put the time in to write that nonsensical garbage, as they obviously have more invested in this than the "50 overweight cyber ****" he's ranting against. But hey, I'll give the benefit of the doubt, let's say it's all real right? This guy says that titles are worthless because of predictable outcomes. Well, by default, TNA and WWE's Titles are worthless as you can get spoilers for their shows days, sometimes weeks in advance. Also, the WWE Championships haven't had a significant, clean victory in years. Is that value? The TNA Title hasn't had a single clean title defense. Is that value? The NWA Title has been thrown in more trashcans than the WCW Television Title. Is that value? I don't put up for ROH so much nowadays because, honestly, I don't like their current product, but why would long title reigns mean less value? It's one thing to have a title for a long time without any important title defenses or matches (Triple H in 2003, for example). It's another when you do. Look at Joe's reign in 04. If the archive goes back that far, you can look at the ROH Message Boards when he was having a semi-main event title match with Trent Acid where people were sure that this was going to be the night he lost. That is value, when a title match against a meaningless opponent actually matters. Can you seriously name one title match in the past five years for the WWE or TNA that mattered? I can think of maybe two.. There haven't been any clean victories for WWE's World titles in years? Newsflash, just about EVERY title change in recent years has been a CLEAN finish, and as for SIGNIFICANT ones, how's these for you: Benoit's WHC win, Orton's WHC win, Edge's first WWE Title win, Edge's second WWE Title win, Orton's WWE Title win, hell...even Edge's WHC win. Want me to name some WWE Title matches that mattered? Cena/Michaels Cena/Orton Orton/Michaels |
|
|
|
Post by Swarm on Feb 23, 2008 14:12:44 GMT -5
There haven't been any clean victories for WWE's World titles in years? Newsflash, just about EVERY title change in recent years has been a CLEAN finish In the past two years, meaning from the beginning of 2006 to right now, a grand total of one guy won a World Title clean, and that was Undertaker. Edge, Batista, Edge again, Triple H, and Randy Orton ALL had unclean finished to their title wins. and as for SIGNIFICANT ones, how's these for you: Benoit's WHC win, Orton's WHC win, Edge's first WWE Title win, Edge's second WWE Title win, Orton's WWE Title win, hell...even Edge's WHC win. And what made them significant? Benoit because he was a mid-carder for six years in the E and they finally pushed him? Well hey, by your logic, the fact that he was such a jobber before and after would devalue his title win immensely. Plus he didn't even win the title in a one on one match, it took two guys to beat the champ. Real memorable. Orton's first title win was a fluke beating the aforementioned unmemorable Chris Benoit, then dropped it less than a month later (uncleanly, might I add). Then he only won the title again after cheating to beat Triple H. Also, Edge hasn't had a SINGLE clean title win to date. Want me to name some WWE Title matches that mattered? Cena/Michaels Cena/Orton Orton/Michaels Why do any of those matter? Michaels was essentially a third string challenger, having not won the Rumble and then Triple H being injured. And he lost to Cena about half a dozen times. Cena and Orton had a bullcrapunclean finish, and Orton and Michaels had a ridiculous, unfair, screwjob gimmick. Boy, that's realistic competition right there. |
|
|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 14:25:51 GMT -5
How do you figure Cena/Orton from SummerSlam had an unclean finish? Or any of Edge's title wins? Do you even KNOW what the  a clean win is? Benoit's title reign was significant because he'd never won the big one, and he did at MSG that night. And how Orton cheat to beat HHH to win the title at No Mercy? It was a LAST MAN STANDING match, there was no cheating involved. Batista never had a dirty finish to any of his title wins, either. Your logic is completely baffling, you make JSWO look intelligent. Oh, I just noticed you said Benoit was a midcarder for six years. I think your memory is bad, because he was almost always upper midcard-main event from 1998-2004 |
|
T1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jan 23, 2008 11:51:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,511
|
Post by T1 on Feb 23, 2008 14:34:44 GMT -5
There haven't been any clean victories for WWE's World titles in years? Newsflash, just about EVERY title change in recent years has been a CLEAN finish And what made them significant? Benoit because he was a mid-carder for six years in the E and they finally pushed him? Well hey, by your logic, the fact that he was such a jobber before and after would devalue his title win immensely. Plus he didn't even win the title in a one on one match, it took two guys to beat the champ. Real memorable. Orton's first title win was a fluke beating the aforementioned unmemorable Chris Benoit, then dropped it less than a month later (uncleanly, might I add). Then he only won the title again after cheating to beat Triple H. Also, Edge hasn't had a SINGLE clean title win to date. Want me to name some WWE Title matches that mattered? Cena/Michaels Cena/Orton Orton/Michaels Why do any of those matter? Michaels was essentially a third string challenger, having not won the Rumble and then Triple H being injured. And he lost to Cena about half a dozen times. Cena and Orton had a bull **** unclean finish, and Orton and Michaels had a ridiculous, unfair, screwjob gimmick. Boy, that's realistic competition right there. 1. Rey Mysterio at WM22 2. John Cena at Rumble 06.. 3. John Cena at Unforgiven '06.. 4. Bobby Lashley at D2D, if you consider that a World Title 5. Undertaker as you said 6. Bobby Lashley at ONS 7. The Great Khali winning the Battle Royale 8. Batista at Unforgiven 07 9. CM Punk winning the ECW Title from Morrison 10. HHH at No Mercy...even if it were only an hour 11. John Morrison at Vengeance 07 12. Orton LMS at No Mercy There's TWELVE clean title wins right there within the past two years. And really, who cares if the match ends uncleanly? As long as there's a legit finish( Not a DQ/Countout, which can't happen in a title switch anyways) and the match is good, does it really matter if outside interferance helped in the finish? And to say there have been no significant title matches in recent years is absurd. Everybody was really excited for Cena/HHH, Cena/Orton, and Cena/HBK, thinking Cena would lose. Hell, just look at Edge/Taker coming up at WM24. Everybody's excited for that one. |
|
|
|
Post by Swarm on Feb 23, 2008 18:19:42 GMT -5
How do you figure Cena/Orton from SummerSlam had an unclean finish? Or any of Edge's title wins? Do you even KNOW what the a clean win is? A clean finish would be the type where one person beats another without interference, ref bumps, cheating, disqualifications, count-outs, etc... Essentially, a one on one pin or submission victory with no shenanigans. Go ahead, question that logic. Tell me that Edge having two guys interrupt the match allowing him to win is clean. Tell me that Edge attacking a guy after a match then immediately cashing in his Money in the Bank is clean. The irony of it all is, you're sticking up for a company and yet completely confusing their objectives. The whole point of Edge's title wins were to be unclean. If you can't even understand or grasp that, well, I guess I understand why you don't know what a clean finish is. Benoit's title reign was significant because he'd never won the big one, and he did at MSG that night. Significant in what way? Did Benoit's title reign garner any more mainstream attention? Did it improve the ratings? No, as a matter of fact, they dropped. You're going to honestly tell me that title reign meant something when their core audience clearly lost interest, yet during most all of the ROH Champions' reigns, their audience grew larger. Most importantly, with the exception of, I believe, one time in ROH history, their champions won the title with a single, one on one match, not some three-four-six way floppy. And how Orton cheat to beat HHH to win the title at No Mercy? It was a LAST MAN STANDING match, there was no cheating involved. For one, as you said, last man standing match, and for two, it was Triple H's third match of the night. How that qualifies as a clean victory, I don't know. Oh, I just noticed you said Benoit was a midcarder for six years. I think your memory is bad, because he was almost always upper midcard-main event from 1998-2004 Upper Mid-Carder is a term invented by internet smarks who want to glorify their favorite wrestlers' position in the company. Benoit, in-between the three or four Heavyweight Title feuds he had (which he lost) in his five-six years of being in the WWE, was basically just a hand. He had no character, no push, no promotion. All Benoit ever did was put over guys they were pushing. Has nothing to do with his skill, but that's how he was used. The only reason his title win means anything to anyone, is because they either followed his career from Japan or WCW, or were on the internet and part of that community. Well, that's not the majority of the people watching, or even the majority of WWE's core audience. Hence, ratings drop. |
|
|
|
Post by Swarm on Feb 23, 2008 18:29:17 GMT -5
There's TWELVE clean title wins right there within the past two years. And really, who cares if the match ends uncleanly? As long as there's a legit finish( Not a DQ/Countout, which can't happen in a title switch anyways) and the match is good, does it really matter if outside interferance helped in the finish? I'm not gonna bother going match by match examining the clean/unclean aspects of each because... well that'd be a big waste of everyone's time. Here's what you gotta understand, I'm not arguing that an unclean finish ruins wrestling or whatever. I said at the beginning that I don't watch WWE and get invested in it as a real product or anything of that nature. I think unclean finishes can be great if used right, but that's not my point. The point is, this guy was arguing that the ROH Title had no credibility as a legitimate title, and my point is if you were to look at it as a competitive championship, it has just as much, if not more, credibility than the WWE Championship. Not because it's bigger, has a better reputation or whathaveyou, but, well look at it this way; How would the UFC World Title look if Nogueira was about to lose against Sylvia, then Crocop ran in and decked the referee and led to Nogueira winning? Would that be a credible win? Look at the recent steroid issue with Baseball. Because Barry Bonds may have taken steroids when he beat the home run record, ala cheating, that win has lost all credibility. So, put that in wrestling logic. Assuming wrestling was real, the WWE and World Heavyweight Titles would have absolutely no credibility as nobody ever wins or defends the title cleanly. That's my only point. I don't think you should look at WWE that way, I don't think it matters, but if you were to, the belt would have no credibility. And to say there have been no significant title matches in recent years is absurd. Everybody was really excited for Cena/HHH, Cena/Orton, and Cena/HBK, thinking Cena would lose. Hell, just look at Edge/Taker coming up at WM24. Everybody's excited for that one. I brought this point up in my last reply, but I'll make it here again. What defines significant? Because the internet wanted to see it? Did Cena/HHH draw more buys than if it would've been Cena/Bob Holly? No. Did any of those feuds spike the ratings or improve buyrates? No. As a matter of fact, the WWE rating (RAW, at least), has been generally the same for the past four years. The people watching WWE now are your core audience, the ones who watch it regardless of the feuds or overall direction. A significant match, for example, would be say, Lesnar/Angle from WM19. The ratings were good, there was a lot of hype from news media as well as WWE itself, and the buyrate was very good. As for Edge/Taker, even I'm kind of looking forward to that, but I think you'd agree that it would be a match worth seeing with or without the title. The title is really a means to an end in that whole program, to be honest. |
|
|
|
Post by fallenhero on Feb 23, 2008 18:34:13 GMT -5
How do you figure Cena/Orton from SummerSlam had an unclean finish? Or any of Edge's title wins? Do you even KNOW what the a clean win is? A clean finish would be the type where one person beats another without interference, ref bumps, cheating, disqualifications, count-outs, etc... Essentially, a one on one pin or submission victory with no shenanigans. Go ahead, question that logic. Tell me that Edge having two guys interrupt the match allowing him to win is clean. Tell me that Edge attacking a guy after a match then immediately cashing in his Money in the Bank is clean. The irony of it all is, you're sticking up for a company and yet completely confusing their objectives. The whole point of Edge's title wins were to be unclean. If you can't even understand or grasp that, well, I guess I understand why you don't know what a clean finish is. Whether you want to admit it or not, the two MITB based Edge title wins were clean victories. No interference, no ref bumps, no cheating. He won the match clean. You lose. He didn't cheat, no interference, no BS. He won the title cleanly. You lose again. Oh, I just noticed you said Benoit was a midcarder for six years. I think your memory is bad, because he was almost always upper midcard-main event from 1998-2004 Upper Mid-Carder is a term invented by internet smarks who want to glorify their favorite wrestlers' position in the company. Benoit, in-between the three or four Heavyweight Title feuds he had (which he lost) in his five-six years of being in the WWE, was basically just a hand. He had no character, no push, no promotion. All Benoit ever did was put over guys they were pushing. Has nothing to do with his skill, but that's how he was used. The only reason his title win means anything to anyone, is because they either followed his career from Japan or WCW, or were on the internet and part of that community. Well, that's not the majority of the people watching, or even the majority of WWE's core audience. Hence, ratings drop.[/quote] Regardless if you want to admit it or not (again), Benoit was almost always at the top of the card from 1998-2004. I'm not glorifying Benoit's position, he was just as I called him. An upper mid-carder. He wasn't in the lower card, or the mid card. You're a complete tool, dude. You've already lost the debate. Give it up. |
|
|
|
Post by twosober on Feb 23, 2008 19:00:07 GMT -5
what makes a title useful? really.
|
|
|
|
Post by kentakobashi on Feb 23, 2008 19:21:09 GMT -5
that article is so true. all the kid's that love ANYTHING to do with ROH,love it just because it's not WWE.Not because they have ever been to an event.not because they actually like the wrestlers that wrestle for the promotion,just because most of the fans are sheep and like anything anti-WWE. because WWE is the big bad giant of wrestling.the worst is the kids that post and say stupid things like "OMFG WHY DID CIDERZ LOSE SO QUICK FUK ROH I <3 TEH PWG NOW!" well maybe because EVERY other champion had a lengthy title reign? maybe they wanted to change it up?that and the people that went ape crapwhen Morishima won the strap,saying he's horrible and Gabe and such,when they had only seen Takeshi is one match.i honestly just hate 99% of ROH fans. |
|
|
|
Post by kentakobashi on Feb 23, 2008 19:22:33 GMT -5
what makes a title useful? really. when after they win whichever title is in question, people can say. "yep,they've reached the pinnacle." |
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on Feb 23, 2008 19:46:46 GMT -5
How do you figure Cena/Orton from SummerSlam had an unclean finish? Or any of Edge's title wins? Do you even KNOW what the a clean win is? Benoit's title reign was significant because he'd never won the big one, and he did at MSG that night. And how Orton cheat to beat HHH to win the title at No Mercy? It was a LAST MAN STANDING match, there was no cheating involved. Batista never had a dirty finish to any of his title wins, either. Your logic is completely baffling, you make JSWO look intelligent. Oh, I just noticed you said Benoit was a midcarder for six years. I think your memory is bad, because he was almost always upper midcard-main event from 1998-2004 Actually Batista retained the title in HIAC due to Edge's interference. That wasnt clean. |
|
