Is WWE afraid of a Daniel Bryan backlash?

Discussion in 'RAW' started by Senhor Perfect, Feb 6, 2014.

  1. Reading all the DB opinions recently got me wondering. All the main stars, at some point begin to receive backlash from the fans. It happened with arguably the greatest face of all time Hulk Hogan in the mid nineties, and has been happening with Cena for quite a while.

    Perhaps they're doing this extremely slow burn with DB because they're afraid that once he gets the title, people will lose interest and start their backlash. He's getting massive pops, and is drawing interest being in "chase" mode. Will it still be as intriguing if he gets the title and starts being an underdog champion?

    So, do you think the fans would grow tired of DB if he won the title? Do you think WWE brass is afraid to give him the title due to that reason?

    Keep in mind I don't mean will the hardcore DB marks turn, I'm talking about the masses.
     
  2. He has to be badly booked for a number of years for a backlash to happen. Wouldn't happen.
     
  3. I see it a lot like Austin Aries in TNA. Here's a brand new star the fans love with all the momentum in the world, and the fans were excited about him chasing the belt... then he won it in about a month, we all marked out, and while his title reign accomplished little and he lost it a few months later for business reasons (since companies still think that transparent cash grabs work in 2014) Aries never really suffered from the backlash from his fans, and we all still picture him as one of the top guys.

    Right now, there's plenty of DB haters just because the love for the guy is so strong... but the fans are bound to turn on him eventually (see how this entire forum has turned on CM Punk...). Just part of the process. Fans want a fluid, ever changing main event scene, and while DB is a huge part of a ME scene that's seen one new guy (Punk) enter it since 2009, it's only a matter of time before the fans latch onto a new guy chasing the belt.
     
    • Like Like x 7
  4. I wouldn't call it a 'backlash' per se because that would imply actual negative reactions, but I do see less interest in Bryan and less enthusiasm in chanting YES all the time once he finally reaches the mountain top. His popularity will never die down completely but I do see his reactions cooling off once he finally gets an actual run with the belt. The chase is always the funnest part and Bryan doesn't really have enough charisma or an interesting enough personality imo to really sustain interest at the top for very long.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. WWE fear's it's fans.?:isee:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. There will be some kind of backlash once he has the belt. There always is. The chase is what makes any guy more interesting, which is why it's normal for a heel to carry titles longer in general than a face would. Fans want to see the chase culminating in the fan favorite finally getting the prize. But, once Bryan finally gets his title run, expect people to start hating more and more vocally. I agree with Snowman that what you've seen with Punk in recent memory on this very forum is what you will see with DBD once he becomes Champion.

    As to his perceived lack of charisma, KLockard23, I must disagree, old friend. I think he's got plenty and have always found his personas to be both interesting and entertaining. But, different strokes and all.

    wk
     
  7. I'm with wk Bryan has heaps of personality he's the most relatable guy in WWE atm.
     
  8. I think quite the opposite to be honest. I feel like fan reactions may go down if he continues to miss out on the title. How many times do you want to pay to see someone lose?
     
  9. This will happen, too. But history teaches us that fans will pay more to watch the hero chase the gold and lose several times than they will to watch the same hero carry the gold. It is a fine line, though. The smart bookers have always had their hero lose just enough for fans to get really exasperated but not for those fans to get turned off. Its especially true in pro wrestling, where every viewer over the age of six (well, okay, not EVERY viewer) knows it's scripted. So, there has to be a payoff where the hero wins.

    Of course, then he has to lose again, so he can pursue the title all over again. Kinda like Rocky III.

    wk
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Vince is shitting his pants at how over Daniel is where as Batista isnt
     
  11. That has nothing to do with my OP. :idk:
     
  12. Why must you derail every thread. You're like the female Gohan but stupider.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. So Vince is mad that one guy makes him a ton of money?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. I don't think WWE keeps fans in mind when booking shit. I really don't.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. I see this opinion bandied about on this site a lot, and I don't completely disagree with it.

    But, I don't think it's necessarily because they dislike or don't care about the fans. I think it's often because of two things: business and creativity.

    Vince, Steph, Levesque, Laurinaitis, etc., have a ton of data related to things like ratings, PPV buys, merchandise sales, focus group results, reports from road agents, contract experts (things like main event matches are sometimes included in people's contracts, partciularly the part-time guys like Batista, Rocky, etc.), and a dozen or more other data points from people who are experts in the entertainment industry and have ideas about how to increase the company's income. These are important factors not just to the McMahon family and the Board of Directors, but to the shareholders who have invested in the WWE. To that point, they don't care about the fans, insofar as the fans do not know all of this wealth of information relating to sales, reports, contracts, etc.

    Combine these business concerns with the fact that these are creative people. They have a storyline (actually, several that are more or less interconnected) in mind and...well....they think that their idea is better than everybody else's. This is not an idea limited to people who work for WWE. I see it on this very website. Some of you get married to one idea about how a storyline should play out and, when someone else offers a minor point of change or contention, I see people defending it like it was an article of faith to the Holy Catholic Church. The difference between most of the people on this site and the writers for WWE is that the WWE writers actually get paid for this, mostly because at some level, they've proven themselves capable of writing storylines for popular consumption. To that point, they don't care about the fans, because they know better than the fans what people want to see.

    Does this mean we shouldn't discuss these things? Of course not. I'm of the belief that it's our right to piss, moan, bitch, etc., about things we like or don't like. I think we sometimes forget one important fact: most of us are going to watch regardless of whether or not we really like what's going on. Because most of us came to the conclusion at some point that we enjoy the storylines, the physicality, etc. of pro wrestling, even when certain parts of the story don't make us happy. However, the "casuals" may watch or they may decide to watch whatever else comes on Monday, Friday, Wednesday, or Sunday evenings. Does this mean that their storylines always satisfy the fans, casual or hardcore? No, but more times than not, they do. I was personally very unhappy that CM Punk lost the WWE Championship to the Rock at last year's Royal Rumble and even more unhappy when he didn't get included in the Championship Match in any way at Wrestlemania. But, if it weren't for that, we wouldn't have gotten Punk/Undertaker, which was an amazing match (yeah, yeah, not everybody thought it was....I don't care....I think it was an amazing match) and it made up, to a large part, for the fact that he wasn't given an even longer Championship reign that lasted at least to Wrestlemania. But I didn't miss an episode. Why? Because I'm a WWE fan. And that's what they know about me. I'm going to watch and I'm going to make the best of it, coming here to piss and moan when I'm unhappy with something, but I'm still going to watch next week.

    wk
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. I hate to pick out such a small part of your huge post but I definitely hated Punk/Taker (boring) and how can anyone be 'unhappy' that Rock beat Punk? He was definitely the most kayfabe viable competitor to end his reign. He's the damn Rock ffs. If a Punk fan was upset about how he was booked during that title reign I would honestly want to kick them in the nads. I'm a DZ fan and you are mad Punk's 430 day title reign didn't make it to 500? fuck off. no offense.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. None taken. Just stay away from my nads.

    wk
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. First time you've told a guy that :dawg:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Only because you suggested kicking them. First time you haven't been offering to...do other things to them...:gusta:

    wk