Opinions on a part time champion

Discussion in 'RAW' started by Dat Kid, Mar 1, 2013.

  1. I was thinking about this earlier and even though Raw was pretty good this week it felt kind of off without a WWE champion on the show. I'm sure he'll be missing maybe 1 or 2 more on the way to WM29, which isn't bad but chances are he'll more than likely just be doing promos like always.

    It is entertaining, but it just doesn't sit right with me that Rock probably won't be wrestling on a regular bi weekly basis at least. I know it's important to not get him injured because of mania and his various movie projects, but how am I suppose to enjoy is reign when all he does when he's on Raw is talk. He could have great matches with some of talent on Raw (this is the part where everyone salivates at the thought of Rock vs Ziggler). I just feel Rock's reign doesn't feel right with him not being on Raw and not wrestling when he is there which is what I can see happening and being justified as saving any in ring for mania.

  2. When Punk lost the title, I had a feeling things like this would happen. It's why I'd have prefered him to have mentored a superstar so that way he can appear do his thing on the mic and we get a decent wrestling match every week. Ah well, the Rock fans got what they wanted xD
  3. Cheapens the title for me, but hey, what can we do about it.

    WWE is getting their publicity and that's all they're bothered about... unfortunately :pity2:
  4. I tink the issue prob is don't matter who the champ is lets just say punk/cena, they would still have matches on raw or sd, there would be some promo stuff going on and we would get a main event, this really aint gonna happen now, as rock is away doing shit and cena really can't do a proper promo , as rock is away, so i guess rock being away hurts the title match big time
  5. I didn't think it was a big deal this past Monday because Rock didn't really have a place on the show anyway. It was all about the hype of Cena and Punk's encounter to see who would win and go to Wrestlemania to challenge The Rock. To have the champ on the show giving a promo that wouldn't have added anything would have felt like meaningless filler. He could have been at ringside and maybe did commentary during the match and then stood eye to eye with the winner afterwards but it worked out just as well to have Rock tweet at the end about how he looked forward to clashing with Cena.

    Otherwise, I agree that it's annoying to not have the champion on Raw for three weeks in a row but the WWE sees it as the positives of Rock being the champ outweighing the negatives so what can you do.
  6. It's a tremendously bad idea to put the title on a part-time wrestler (but it's still better than putting it on a non-wrestler...I'm looking at you, Vince Russo). Of course, it was kind of silly to have Rocky beat Cena and Punk in the last year anyway. I mean, examine the logic: Cena and Punk are the two top guys in the WWE, but neither of them can beat a guy who hasn't competed regularly (barely any, really) in seven years. It had been nine years since Rock was part of the main event scene when he beat Cena at Wrestlemania 28; it had been ten when he beat Punk at Rumble and Elimination Chamber. So, apparently, these two guys, who "fight for a living" (remember, that's the internal logic of professional wrestling) can't beat a guy who's been out of the game for nearly a decade?

    Meanwhile, the Dallas Cowboys have re-signed Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, and Michael Irvin. This lead to the 49ers re-signing Steve Young and Jerry Rice. So, we should expect the 49ers and Cowboys to play in the next NFC Championship Game, right?

  7. I don't have a problem with the champ not being on every show tbh, it kind of adds to the prestige IMO (only seeing the champ at big moments rather than every week.)
  8. Just a different viewpoint.

    I think the champ should be the centerpiece of every show. If he's wrestling (which he should do often, even if not every week), he should always be the main event. After all, he's supposed to be the best in the world (not just saying it because it's a catchphrase...that's what the title is supposed to signify).

    If he's not wrestling, he should still be there to address the crowd in some capacity. But, I guess the people of Dallas, Texas, where there are a ton of The People, btw, don't deserve to cheer for the Rock in person.


    But, that's alright, the fine people of Waco, Texas, just 100 miles from Dallas, got the Undertaker. And he's better than the Rock, so, there...

  9. That's one of the reasons why I didn't want him to win the title, the championship should be on RAW every week.
  10. So that's why you're called WacoKid :cornette:

    As for the champion not being on every show, the reason I'm against it is to build interest on every title (another could be the focus, say the WWE champ isn't on, the IC championship could become the focus of the show. This in turn would force the company to put established stars into the division so it drew, bringing the prestige up - say we do it in 2 week cycles, WWE Champion off - on - off - on in a standard build to a PPV, they would always be on the go home show however and the one post PPV.) Also it would give off the big fight feel whenever the champ was on, reducing the time it took for a champ to feel stale.

    I understand your best in the world aspect but I can see it being solid for the companies progression.
  11. Well, finally someone who's a Rock fan touches on this subject. Thank you. I, for one, find it just plain wrong that Rock is the champ. Waco touched on the main problem for me, he hasn't wrestled in 10 years and beat the top two wrestlers in the company. Is that how a part timer should be used? No. And it's not as the champ, either. The people who go to house shows are ignored, and it just feels like a spit in the face when the company's champion has more important things to do than to show up on the company's flagship show. So, overall, for me it feels wrong that a part timer like Rock won the title and his reign is a joke. And the usual positive side for Rock as champ is nullified for me, as (maybe because I didn't watch him in his prime, who knows) I don't find him as extremely entertaining as most people do. For me, he wrestles decent matches at best and his promos consist of way too many catchphrases and wrestling unrelated stories for my taste, that is when he shows up. He draws, yes, and that's all good and nice for WWE, but as someone who only watches the product and doesn't have any money on WWE I dislike it.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Rock blows chunks in the ring nowadays IMO, he's horrid. On the mic when he's intense he's gold but when he tries to do the stories he's shit also, great crowd control still though.
  13. The Champ should always be in RAW ....

    He's gonna miss half of the road to WM .
  14. True. I said decent because the EC match was decent, but the Rumble match... oh boy.

    But yeah, I can't deny his control of the crowd either, he knows how to work the mic very well but his style just doesn't appeal to me.
  15. His match with Cena at Wrestlemania, while he all knew it wouldn't be a classic in terms of in-ring quality, was even more average than expected. Just slow, long and boring. I don't get why people hate his Rumble and (especially) Elimination Chamber matches with Punk, though. Rumble was pretty good and EC was great, in my opinion.
  16. if they had the same scheduale a full timer would have whilst holding the title it would be fine if not then no
  17. Just throwing it out there but his rumble one was basically him lying down holding his ribs as Punk hit him, it was incredibly slow IMO especially with Punk the standard is always high due to his previous work, with Cena I expected a meh match but I expected Punk / Rock to be a good back and forth match, especially with Rock looking slimmer.

    The EC match was an improvement but really didn't entertain me the way Punk / Cena did for example, it wasn't Punk / Ryback bad (me vs you would have probably been better than that) but it still wasn't Punk standard for me.

    Just my 2 pence (F your cents 'Murica :finger: )
  18. In terms of wrestling EC wasn't an amazing match but the storytelling in that match was great. It was similar to Taker/HHH at last year's mania where it wasn't the best thing we've ever seen, but the way it was presented was enough for it to be great. Not every match has to be a display of great technical prowess.

    Just my 2 cents (F your pence Eurofags :mad: )
  19. I wasn't even that keen on the story tbh (I'm a huge fag about story telling in wrestling and that one didn't seem to have it, a powerful tool could have been more Heyman interference but even he wasn't that involved. Plus The Rock getting disqualified gimmick was basically annoyed (A dusty finish should have been used here IMO although that would have been over kill with the rumble moment admittedly, although they did it twice to Benoit at Fully Loaded and Unforgiven 2000. The finish was this " Benoit continued to attack Rock until Rock brought a chair into the ring to attack Benoit but dropped it. However, McMahon brought another chair into the ring and hit the referee with it. Rock mocked Benoit by applying The Cripler Crossface and Benoit tapped out to the hold. However, as the referee recovered, he disqualified Rock because he did not see McMahon hitting him with the chair. As a result, Benoit won the title but the WWF Commissioner Mick Foley came out and restarted the match. Rock and Benoit continued to battle each other until Rock performed a Rock Bottom to win the match and thus retained the WWF Championship.[1][2]" from Wiki so running something similar to that would have told a stronger story for me.
  20. Maybe I thought the Rumble match was better than it really was because it wasn't painfully slow and boring like the Cena match at WM was. It didn't bore me anyway and I was into it so that was enough for me. Don't get why people would complain about the EC match, especially the last five or six minutes.