It is currently: Mar 28, '24, 5:29 am

ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

This is where we display classic threads so that we can enjoy them long into the future. Feel free to continue posting in them.

Who was better?

Savage
24
63%
Cena
14
37%
 
Total votes : 38

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Tom » Mar 31, '14, 3:43 pm

I think another factor that needs to be considered is "who has made you turn off your TV more often?". If that is the case, Savage should win every single time. No main event level talent over the past three/four years has made me turn off my TV more often than Cena. Well, maybe Del Rio but he is not on the list so he doesn't matter.

Oh, and if you have not seen them already, here is a link to Macho Man's matches with DDP. Great chemistry they had:

@Spring Stampede
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2up6x ... vage_sport

@Great American Bash
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xzm4fn ... match_spor

@Halloween Havoc
PT 1 - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1kiln ... rt-1_sport
PT 2 - http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1kj39 ... rt-2_sport

I couldn't get the dailymotion coding working unfortunately!
  • 1

Tom None specified
Indy Darling
Indy Darling
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 294
Topics: 23
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 280

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby BSM » Mar 31, '14, 4:14 pm

If this had been several years ago, I may have picked Cena, but he's just gotten kind of boring lately. It's just the same thing over and over again.
  • 0

Image
User avatar
BSM Male
Indy Darling
Indy Darling
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 226
Topics: 3
Age: 34
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 178

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Cena54 » Mar 31, '14, 4:39 pm

Ok I really dont get how this is happening, Macho is a legend and all i know but he's old news, John is the best of all time. Only Ric Flair has more championships, John Cena has way more championships then savage. Also noone in the history of the WWE worked harder than Cena, it's unreal honestly. I dont understand why people cant appreciate greatness when it's here but you know maybe that's why savage is winning, people dont remember and cant see that Cena is the best.
  • 1

User avatar
Cena54 None specified
Gym Rat
Gym Rat
 
9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership9 years of membership
 
Posts: 43
Topics: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014
Reputation: -61

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Str8Shooter » Mar 31, '14, 5:13 pm

First off, loving the discussion in here, pretty sure Messiah's post qualifies as a novel. Daz matches are shorter.


Savage has got to win, which he will, but I'm surprised Cena has so many votes.


Savage was one of a kind, there's literally been nobody else to come along quite like him in 20 years since he's been around on a regular basis. From the colourful outfits to the cowboy hats and sunglasses, to the gravelly voice and the poetic, passionate promos, the guy is one of the most memorable characters of all time.

Macho was a guy who could transfer from heel to face and back again and have the crowd eating out of the palm of his hand. And his ability to make the crowd care without words, just with his actions, a look here, a point there. In his "retirement" match with Ultimate Warrior, he went from a despised heel with Sherri in his corner at the beginning of the match, to a beloved face, with people crying in their seats for him after he got attacked by Sherri and then saved by Elizabeth. All this in the course of ONE MATCH! Not many people could evoke that kind of emotion.


Cena is one of the most divisive characters in wrestling history, just read this thread and you'll have a bunch of reasons why. I myself have a love/hate relationship with Cena, because I know he's capable of being an interesting character, a good promo, and a damn good in-ring worker, as he's shown on many occasions. The problem with Cena is the consistency, and he hasn't been able to grasp that. He is stale as people have said, and it's not entirely his fault.

WWE has 7-8 hours of TV every week, plus online content and stuff. When Savage wrestled, they didnt even have Raw for most of his run, it was 4 PPV's a year as well. As much as people loved Macho, if he was on TV as much as Cena has been over the past 10 years, there would be plenty of people saying his "oohhh yeah" shtick was getting old and he should go away, believe me. Another reason, the writing and the freedom of today. Today's WWE has Hollywood writers and is heavily scripted, more so than Savage's WWF run. Savage never had people in his ear telling him what to say in a promo, I can promise that. Savage has smart, wrestling people booking his storylines as well.


Ultimately, Savage was the better wrestler, character, and the only thing you could argue in favour of Cena is his longevity and the fact that Cena isn't nearly the psycho Savage was :P . But Cena is deserving of being in the tournament and hopefully in the future people will be able to appreciate what he's done better than they do now.
  • 4

User avatar
Str8Shooter Male
Creative Team
Main Eventer
Main Eventer
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 3896
Topics: 359
Age: 37
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Reputation: 1477

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby JDD » Mar 31, '14, 5:50 pm

Savages Rap Album >>>>>>>>>>>> Cena's and that alone gives him my vote.
  • 4

Image


THANKS IRIN
User avatar
JDD Male
Intercontinental Champ
Intercontinental Champ
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 998
Topics: 78
Age: 27
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: New York
Reputation: 461

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Chewy » Mar 31, '14, 6:44 pm

I voted for Cena.
  • 0

Image

Wyatt sig by the dazzling Tim.
User avatar
Chewy None specified
Next Big Thing
Next Big Thing
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 1768
Topics: 21
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 853

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Ace » Mar 31, '14, 7:05 pm

I agree that Macho Man is awesome. I just about gave him my vote & maybe I should. My only point about Cena is that Cena somehow has become the face of a company that isn't as popular as it was 15 years ago. I know that he gets booed & hated on but he's still has a huge fan base which is saying a lot when the guy is compared to a Hall of Famer like the Savage...

That is all...
  • 0

Image
User avatar
Ace Male
Midcard Attraction
Midcard Attraction
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 614
Topics: 35
Age: 30
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Reputation: 158
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby HFX » Mar 31, '14, 7:08 pm

Cena54 wrote:Ok I really dont get how this is happening, Macho is a legend and all i know but he's old news, John is the best of all time. Only Ric Flair has more championships, John Cena has way more championships then savage. Also noone in the history of the WWE worked harder than Cena, it's unreal honestly. I dont understand why people cant appreciate greatness when it's here but you know maybe that's why savage is winning, people dont remember and cant see that Cena is the best.


Image
  • 0

Image

Thanks Tim for the great sig and avy.

#TIM2020
Make America Tim Again
User avatar
HFX Male
Next Big Thing
Next Big Thing
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 1620
Topics: 43
Age: 34
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: The Great White North
Reputation: 496

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby VaderBomb » Apr 01, '14, 2:14 am

Cena isn't even close to being on Savage's level.
  • 2

User avatar
VaderBomb Male
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2086
Topics: 177
Age: 36
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Reputation: 1332

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Daz » Apr 03, '14, 2:47 am

I'll probably catch some flack for it, but I'm gonna have to go with Cena.

I'm a huge Savage fan, he'll always rank as one of my favourites. One of the reasons I kept watching wrestling when I was younger. But to give Cena credit, he's show a ridiculous amount of longevity and it's not simply because WWE are stubborn and don't create new stars, it's because Cena is reliable, he's the hardest working man in wrestling and he'll make them money one way or another. It's hard to argue against those things. We as a collective group of fans might not always like what they do with Cena the character, but he's proven successful in spite of the constant calls that he can't wrestler or protests that he should turn heel. He's still a top guy, and contrary to belief, he's a very good wrestler at this point.

Savage, is one of the greatest of all time. But, he never had to carry the company. Even during his peak, running with the title, he was second fiddle to Hogan. That's not necessarily a knock against him or to say he couldn't have really carried the company had the opportunity been afforded him ... but he never had that responsibility. Probably for the best as he was extremely paranoid and meticulous and probably wouldn't have done near as well as Hogan did in that environment. Was he over? Sure. So was Brutus the Barber Beefcake ... you can't really use that scale to judge on.

As an in ring performer, are Cena and Savage on the same level? I'd say no, Savage is probably a few paces ahead. Again, it's hard to judge as it's a different time and the style is so drastically different. But let's not pretend that every Savage match was a five star classic. He had some shockers too. To say Cena isn't diverse is also rather silly in my opinion. He got a watchable match out of the Great Khali, had some modern classics with Punk, Edge, HBK, Umaga ... they're all pretty diverse in their own right. Good workers too, but they certainly didn't carry Cena. I'd say in general, the guys Savage had to work with during his WWE run were all of a similar mold. Wrestling as a whole during that time period didn't have a whole lot of diversity.

As far as Cena never working heel goes, he did, he did so very well. It's what got him over in the first place and forced the face turn. And this was when he was at his poorest as an in ring performer. And saying he's stale because he's worked the same gimmick since 05 ... Savage had the same gimmick from the moment he entered WWE to his run in WCW. He changed his name to the Macho King for while, and there was Macho Madness and NWO Savage ...but he was always the same Savage really. Different valets, different names, the occasional scepter, no matter what he was always just the Macho Man.
  • 6

Image
Click image to get your tits blown off by my literary prowess.
User avatar
Daz Male
Referee
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2885
Topics: 25
Age: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1382

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Messiah » Apr 03, '14, 8:06 am

John Cena's longevity is becoming so overrated here. Yes, a big part of that is due to WWE's refusal to create new stars. There are no ifs, ands, and buts about that. Look at the WrestleMania 30 card. There are 14 superstars in the 5 actual matches on the main card (counting the Battle Royal or the Divas match as a match, I will not do but that is a different story). 9 of those guys competed at a WrestleMania 10 or more years ago. So, yes, the WWE's failure to even attempt to create another compelling stars is a huge reason why John Cena remains on top. Fans have been bored of Cena for a very long time, so it isn't like John Cena is some entertaining champion who has been on top for years while still being what the fans actually want. There is a reason the WWE continues to bring in the likes of Brock Lesnar and The Rock to attract viewers because what they have now just isn't capable. John Cena's drawing power nowadays is ridiculously overstated and exaggerated.

The fact of the matter is, wrestlers nowadays are just lasting longer than they used to. Wrestlers nowadays stay in one company longer than they did in the 90s and 80s because, why not? The WWE is the only company that matters in America and most guys do not want to travel to Japan (nor can a lot afford to). Back in the 80s and 90s, there were several promotions superstars spread to and honed their skills. You have one exception in Hulk Hogan; otherwise, nobody stayed on top that long because everything was always moving. Companies were always changing the wheel and how everything worked from within. Stone Cold Steve Austin, the guy everyone here considers a legend, was only on top in any company (WWE) from 1998-2001. Maybe you could throw in 1997, but that is still only roughly 3-4 years... and during that time span, he missed an entire year completely! Even without the injuries, by the time Austin retired, he was 39 years old and not as important piece of the product anymore (that was clear in 2002). Austin was on his way out soon regardless but I don't think anyone is going to say Cena is a better worker because he was capable of lasting longer. Austin didn't get to the WWE until he was 32 years old. Cena debuted at 25 and won his first WWE Championship at 28.

John Cena is still the top guy because the WWE hasn't made any kind of effort to push anyone else. People can point to CM Punk's year long title reign but he was never treated as being important. He took a backseat to Undertaker/HHH, Rock/Cena, hell even John Cena and John Laurinaitis took the main event on the same night CM Punk was defending his WWE Championship against Daniel Bryan! What happens when it looks like Ryback could become extremely popular, especially with the way fans were cheering for him? They turn him heel and job him to Cena. They have never once attempted to build anyone up to be Cena's equal unless it is The Rock, Triple H, Brock Lesnar, and The Undertaker, and only one of those guys (Triple H) actually routinely appears throughout the year. He also happens to be 44 years old and only wrestles, at most, 2-3 times in a year.

As far as Cena never working heel goes, he did, he did so very well. It's what got him over in the first place and forced the face turn.


John Cena has been the same exact character/alignment since 2005. Is that not true? And it is boring. He has been on top for nearly 10 years and NOTHING has changed about him at all. The biggest difference are his attire colors.

nd saying he's stale because he's worked the same gimmick since 05


Why would you say he is stale then?

And don't tell me he isn't because that would be 100% false - nobody can possibly believe that he isn't. And it isn't even necessarily the fact he has kept the same character (a lot of guys aren't truly changing their character as much as it is their approach and altering themselves whether it be their alignment, attire, etc. just as you mentioned with Randy Savage... he was always the Macho Man) as much as it is the character is as bland as Dean Malenko. John Cena is a "defy the odds character," despite the fact there are no odds for him. He has won the WWE Championship more than anyone in WWE history. He almost always wins. He no longer really relates to anyone in the audience because he is a corporate guy who is portrayed as having no flaws or traits or issues anyone could say, "hey, that is almost like me/my situation."

Hulk Hogan, someone John Cena cannot match in popularity, even began to get booed when he arrived in WCW. Hulk Hogan got booed. Why? Because nobody wanted to see his, basically, superman gimmick anymore. If Hulk Hogan can get booed and become stale due to having such a bland character, lets not pretend like John Cena is immune from it because he isn't Hulk Hogan as far as popularity goes. He is almost certainly stale because his gimmick, character, portrayal, whatever, sucks and it hasn't changed a tiny bit since 2005.

And for whatever it is worth, yes, I believe Randy Savage would probably get stale too if he hadn't changed at all (alignment or anything) for nearly 10 years. And while people can say that is a fault on booking, it doesn't change how Cena is seen (to most people). I have never said Cena is a bad performer. I actually remember being one of the main people defending him on WWE-Club. But the fact is John Cena is boring and he has been for a long time. He isn't nearly as good in the ring as Savage, he doesn't have better charisma, he doesn't have better mic skills. There is nothing at all he does better than Savage. The main reason people have given for picking Cena is because he has lasted on top longer and that, to me, means nothing. Everyone is lasting longer than before. Randy Orton won his first World Title 10 years ago and is heading into WrestleMania as the World Champion and he is still only 34 years old. That is the same age when Steve Austin won his first WWE Championship! Guys are just lasting longer because they are starting earlier in the WWE due to no other places really mattering.

Not to mention, like I said at the start, I don't see how anyone can say the WWE's failure to create another big time star hasn't played a huge role in why Cena is still "on top." They haven't put in any effort. Once someone seems like they could turn into one, they just job them out. So unless we all want to pretend like John Cena is just more talented than any person to ever come into the WWE and something about him allows to stay on top longer (not true), then I am of the opinion there are plenty of surrounding factors that are playing a big part in his long-lasting stay at the top. And it has not been an entertaining ride in the least.
  • 10

Image
User avatar
Messiah Male
Main Eventer
Main Eventer
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 3230
Topics: 470
Joined: Wed Oct 9, 2013
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
Reputation: 2139

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Daz » Apr 03, '14, 8:20 am

I'm not saying John Cena isn't stale, I'm saying to level him with that criticism when Macho Man played the same gimmick/character for nearly 30 years makes the argument somewhat void in my mind. Was Macho Man still entertaining? Of course he was, hence why I'm a fan. But I also find Cena entertaining, admittedly less frequently.

And yes, the fact WWE is reluctant to create new stars is partly the reason Cena hasn't stayed on top for so long. But then you have to question why they're reluctant to create new stars. One of those reasons is because Cena is such a money making machine and does so well for them ... from a business perspective ... there's no need to. I don't think its a case of "guys lasting longer" it's a case of people being brought along much sooner. Austin had to work his ass off to get in a position to win the WWE title and he was already in the back end of his career from a physical standpoint by the time he hit his peak in terms of success. And like I said, Savage had a 30 year career ... he lasted plenty long enough. It was a different era sure, but he wasn't always THE top guy during that 30 year career.

Longevity is a major factor and is relevant to the argument. He's been the man for the company, the go to guy, the one they trot out for media appearances the guy they know can headline shows and rely on to keep the numbers steady. We may all have issues with him from a creative standpoint, we may also not like the performer, but that's undeniable fact.Savage was never that guy for one reason or another, even when he was the champion. That certainly plays apart into my reasoning and my opinion.

Now I do want to make sure to mention that Savage is one of my favourite workers of all time, so this isn't a knock on him, and I certainly respect your opinion sir.
  • 3

Image
Click image to get your tits blown off by my literary prowess.
User avatar
Daz Male
Referee
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2885
Topics: 25
Age: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1382

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Messiah » Apr 03, '14, 8:46 am

Daz wrote:I'm not saying John Cena isn't stale, I'm saying to level him with that criticism when Macho Man played the same gimmick/character for nearly 30 years makes the argument somewhat void in my mind. Was Macho Man still entertaining? Of course he was, hence why I'm a fan. But I also find Cena entertaining, admittedly less frequently.


Randy Savage still changed alignments, though. Not to mention, like I said, that isn't the problem I necessarily have. It is perfectly fine to keep the same character as many have... given that the character was actually good in the first place. John Cena's is bland, nobody really relates to it because it does not apply to even him anymore, and it isn't appealing to the masses. It is the exact same reason the WCW audience began to turn on Hulk Hogan. The act had been going on for far too long and it isn't an act anyone (WCW fans, that is) wanted in the first place. Now, if you still find Cena entertaining, fair enough.

But then you have to question why they're reluctant to create new stars. One of those reasons is because Cena is such a money making machine and does so well for them ... from a business perspective ... there's no need to.


They don't because they are too lazy to, not because Cena makes too much money (which would just be silly; no business looks at it from that perspective, ever). You can tell by watching the product they are too lazy when booking cards, hence why as I pointed out, 9 of the 14 superstars in actual matches competed at a WrestleMania 10 or more years ago. There is nothing behind the Batista vs. Randy Orton match. Why Batista even won the Royal Rumble is mind boggling to me because there literally is not a story behind it. Batista and Orton are just there and yet they are main eventing the PPV. It's laziness.

Steve Austin made the company a truckload of cash and they still built up The Rock, Kurt Angle, and Triple H as stars (while Austin's injury helped accelerate this, it was going to happen no matter what as 2 of those guys had already won the title prior to 2000 and Angle was going to win it eventually).

I don't think its a case of "guys lasting longer" it's a case of people being brought along much sooner.


I meant that as in they are lasting longer in the same company. It would be rare to see one guy stick in one territory or company for 10+ years back in the 80s and 90s. Now you see plenty of guys in the WWE who have been around for that long or are closing in on it. And them being brought in earlier is true as well.

And like I said, Savage had a 30 year career ... he lasted plenty long enough. It was a different era sure, but he wasn't always THE top guy during that 30 year career.


Of course he wasn't. He had to compete with Hulk Hogan in both the WWE and WCW. John Cena wouldn't have been a top guy either. The difference is back then, WCW and WWE both continued to create new big name stars. The WWE hasn't put any kind of effort into doing the same. Besides, there can be more than 1 top guy. Plenty of companies have proven it. Jim Crockett Promotions had Dusty Rhodes and Ric Flair. WCW had plenty of guys along the way that were a top guy with someone else, beginning with Sting/Flair and ending with Hogan/Goldberg. Savage was a top guy in the WWE with Hogan. That is why Savage headlined so many events.

Not to mention it is a bit unfair and misleading to say 30 years (only about 13 years between WWE and WCW), as if they all saw him competing or in a big company. Randy Savage only actively competed in the WWE for about 7 years (1993-1994, he sparingly wrestled and was mainly the RAW commentator). His first WCW run lasted 2 years and by the time he returned in 1997, he was 45 years old. Of course he was no longer being pushed as a top star.

Longevity is a major factor and is relevant to the argument. He's been the man for the company, the go to guy, the one they trot out for media appearances the guy they know can headline shows and rely on to keep the numbers steady. We may all have issues with him from a creative standpoint, we may also not like the performer, but that's undeniable fact.Savage was never that guy for one reason or another, even when he was the champion. That certainly plays apart into my reasoning and my opinion.


Randy Savage main evented 3 WrestleMania's. He was absolutely a top superstar along with Hulk Hogan and the year he was champion, the WWE drew like crazy (and there can be more than 1 top guy; don't let the WWE's current booking convince you to think otherwise).

And the numbers have not been steady for as long as John Cena has been on top. That is why The Rock, Brock Lesnar, The Undertaker, and Triple H all come to compete on the big shows.

If the only thing we are going to hold against Savage in this argument is that John Cena was a top guy longer, then we may as well just trot John Cena to the finals because nobody lasted on top longer than Cena has except for Hulk Hogan.

John Cena has been on top with the WWE doing nothing to have someone come close aside from possibly Edge for nearly 10 years for reasons why I don't know, but considering it has been a stale, boring run, I don't see why that should be treated as a plus to him. I could understand if they were equal in other areas and using longevity was the deciding factor... but Randy Savage is better in every other area and it isn't that debatable in my opinion. You haven't even bothered to say otherwise. Now if you think Cena is more charismatic, better on the mic, more entertaining, etc., then fair enough and I understand why you choose him even though I would disagree wholeheartedly. But to choose him just because he has been on top longer is very flawed IMO.
  • 3

Image
User avatar
Messiah Male
Main Eventer
Main Eventer
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 3230
Topics: 470
Joined: Wed Oct 9, 2013
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
Reputation: 2139

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Daz » Apr 03, '14, 8:59 am

And not to choose him because his run on top has bored you is a little short sighted and to simply say Savage was better in the ring and better on the microphone is a flawed argument. Was he better on the mic, maybe. It's hard to tell. Savage had a lot more freedom to be his gloriously eccentric self. Cena hasn't exactly got that freedom. He has to be a little more reined in as that's the nature of the product and the way the business is conducted nowadays. Give Savage a script, he never would have kept to it. Cena during his early days when things were a little looser, I defy anyone to tell me he isn't good on the microphone. And even now, stale as he may be, he's capable of cutting a damn fine promo. Yeah, when he comes out and acts goofy and drops one liners in a supposed serious feud, it infuriates me. A lot of that's down to bad booking, more so than the man himself.

As far as in ring skills go, Savage and Cena in my mind aren't all that far apart. Savage was very meticulous and planned everything to a fault. If the opponent could keep up, we got gold like Steamboat/Savage. If the opponent didn't ... well things weren't quite as good. Also, he stands out more because of the era in which he wrestled, due to the fact he was more mobile, athletic and crisp than about 95% of the roster surrounding him. Cena I'd say is the more versatile of the two, but then again it's hard to really judge because the two periods in which they wrestled (at least during their prime) were so vastly different.

And the numbers have definitely been steady during Cena's run on top. Brock and Rock being brought back have been done so to capitalize on the success of those people in other fields, UFC/Movies, in an effort to bump he numbers.
  • 4

Image
Click image to get your tits blown off by my literary prowess.
User avatar
Daz Male
Referee
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2885
Topics: 25
Age: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1382

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Ace » Apr 03, '14, 9:17 am

Daz wrote:And not to choose him because his run on top has bored you is a little short sighted and to simply say Savage was better in the ring and better on the microphone is a flawed argument. Was he better on the mic, maybe. It's hard to tell. Savage had a lot more freedom to be his gloriously eccentric self. Cena hasn't exactly got that freedom. He has to be a little more reined in as that's the nature of the product and the way the business is conducted nowadays. Give Savage a script, he never would have kept to it. Cena during his early days when things were a little looser, I defy anyone to tell me he isn't good on the microphone. And even now, stale as he may be, he's capable of cutting a damn fine promo. Yeah, when he comes out and acts goofy and drops one liners in a supposed serious feud, it infuriates me. A lot of that's down to bad booking, more so than the man himself.

As far as in ring skills go, Savage and Cena in my mind aren't all that far apart. Savage was very meticulous and planned everything to a fault. If the opponent could keep up, we got gold like Steamboat/Savage. If the opponent didn't ... well things weren't quite as good. Also, he stands out more because of the era in which he wrestled, due to the fact he was more mobile, athletic and crisp than about 95% of the roster surrounding him. Cena I'd say is the more versatile of the two, but then again it's hard to really judge because the two periods in which they wrestled (at least during their prime) were so vastly different.

And the numbers have definitely been steady during Cena's run on top. Brock and Rock being brought back have been done so to capitalize on the success of those people in other fields, UFC/Movies, in an effort to bump he numbers.


I've never really met anyone recently who could so effectively argue in favor of Cena
Image
  • 1

Image
User avatar
Ace Male
Midcard Attraction
Midcard Attraction
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 614
Topics: 35
Age: 30
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Reputation: 158
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Messiah » Apr 03, '14, 9:18 am

Daz wrote:And not to choose him because his run on top has bored you is a little short sighted and to simply say Savage was better in the ring and better on the microphone is a flawed argument.


What? How is it flawed? :lol

John Cena's run on top has bored not just me but the majority of fans and if you can't understand why, then I am not the one that is being short-sighted here (and I don't believe you are, just saying I don't see how I am). I will say it for a final time, even Hulk Hogan (!!) got boring and turned on after playing a similar character such as Cena's (Malenko-bland, rarely lose, superhuman efforts, etc.). This is Hulk Hogan we are talking about.

So lets see. John Cena is (these are just my opinions), understandably so, boring. He is lesser in the ring than Macho. He is lesser on the stick than Macho. He has less charisma than Macho. And I think because of all of this, Savage is better. I am not seeing the flaw there at all in my argument for why Macho is better. Savage was better at every major factor (well, I guess except for lasting on top longer) that makes up a superstar. There is nothing flawed about anything. Those are pretty damn important reasons to pick Savage over Cena. To this point, the only thing you have stated is that on the side of Cena is that he has lasted longer than Savage and there are plenty of factors that play a role in that.

Savage had a lot more freedom to be his gloriously eccentric self. Cena hasn't exactly got that freedom.


That may be it, or maybe John Cena's character is just bland and after nearly 10 years, there isn't anything to talk about that we haven't heard before. I doubt John Cena is more restricted than Bray Wyatt, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, etc., all of whom happen to cut much better and interesting promos than John Cena has for several years outside of the occasional and rare one that is pretty damn great, I will admit. But all in all, Savage is far more consistent with his promos than John Cena is.

I defy anyone to tell me he isn't good on the microphone. And even now, stale as he may be, he's capable of cutting a damn fine promo. Yeah, when he comes out and acts goofy and drops one liners in a supposed serious feud, it infuriates me. A lot of that's down to bad booking, more so than the man himself.


I said this exact same thing on the first page. I am not denying John Cena is quality on the microphone. But while that may be the case, it doesn't change the fact we go by what actually happens and John Cena's promos nowadays are not any good. Whether creative is to blame or not, we go by what we see. Cena may have the POTENTIAL to do more but he doesn't do it consistently. If we are going by what they can potentially do, then Savage could potentially have stayed on top just as long as Cena did. He proved he was capable when he was given the run with the WWE Championship. Savage just happened to be getting old by the time he made it big, but he had the potential to do it. But potential doesn't matter in that regard. Savage didn't last on top as long just as John Cena has not cut nearly the amount of quality promos as consistently as Savage did.

As far as in the ring goes, I don't agree but at least you did give another reason aside from Cena just lasting on top longer. Which I just don't think should play as big of a role as you and others in this thread are making it out to be or otherwise, Cena and Hogan should get an automatic pass to the finals.

And the numbers have definitely been steady during Cena's run on top.


Ratings have been declining for years and PPV buyrates have been wildly inconsistent. They have not been steady at all.
  • 0

Image
User avatar
Messiah Male
Main Eventer
Main Eventer
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 3230
Topics: 470
Joined: Wed Oct 9, 2013
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
Reputation: 2139

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Daz » Apr 03, '14, 9:34 am

Well if we're only talking nowadays, Cena is clearly better, seeing as Savage is unfortunately deceased. I'm looking at their complete body of work, otherwise I'd have said Savage was awful during his short TNA run in 05 and left the argument at that. We can't really talk about potential as Cena has the potential to turn heel and completely change his character in the next few years. Is it likely? Probably not, could it happen, sure the possibility is still there. With Savage, we know what he did. We can't judge on what might have been, we can only go on what he did do. He didn't win the title sooner, he didn't stay on top for longer, he didn't carry a company for ten years and he didn't have the opportunity to become one of the biggest stars of all time because of Hulkamania. All of which are unfortunate.

The reason I say it's a flawed argument is because you've given me no reason as to why he's better, other than to actually tell me he's better. You can't just say he has less charisma ... it's subjective. It's something that can't be quantified or measured. I think Alberto Del Rio is charismatic, I bet a few people here would agree with me, and other people would tell me he's bland, awful, boring etc. etc. Also on the promo front, is he less restricted than the guys you listed? Probably not. But also, they're not being asked to cut the same sort of promos Cena is.

Is Cena bland? Of course. Anyone who plays the same character for a decade without much of a change is going to be. I'm not denying this. But so was Savage during his WCW run in my opinion. He'd still have good matches, cut good promos but it was the same thing most of the wrestling world had been watching since 1985. Even when he switched from heel to face, his in ring style never changed, the style of his promos never changed. He was always the same Savage just with slightly different gear. And in that respect ... Cena changes his colours and shorts now and then. You can't level the criticism against one guy when the same thing is applicable to the other in my opinion.

Frankly, I do feel Cena and Hogan should get an automatic pass to the finals. They're the guys that defined their era. They're the ones the casual fans latch on to. They're the ones who were the poster boys of the company. It's a big deal and deserves that respect, whether you like Cena or not.

Honestly, I don't disagree with any point of yours in particular, just trying to provide a somewhat balanced argument.
  • 0

Image
Click image to get your tits blown off by my literary prowess.
User avatar
Daz Male
Referee
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2885
Topics: 25
Age: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1382

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Everlong » Apr 03, '14, 9:35 am

Frankly, I do feel Cena and Hogan should get an automatic pass to the finals. They're the guys that defined their era. They're the ones the casual fans latch on to. They're the ones who were the poster boys of the company. It's a big deal and deserves that respect, whether you like Cena or not.


This tournament isn't necessarily about who was the poster boy or who meant more to the industry: it's about who was better. That can certainly play a role in your choice, but it's not the end all be all.
  • 0

Image

Image

YOU HEARD IT FROM TAJ FIRST FOLKS
User avatar
Everlong Male
SquaredCircle Commisioner
Living Legend
Living Legend
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Topic Author
Posts: 10544
Topics: 2439
Age: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Brew City, USA
Reputation: 3827

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Daz » Apr 03, '14, 9:44 am

Everlong wrote:
Frankly, I do feel Cena and Hogan should get an automatic pass to the finals. They're the guys that defined their era. They're the ones the casual fans latch on to. They're the ones who were the poster boys of the company. It's a big deal and deserves that respect, whether you like Cena or not.


This tournament isn't necessarily about who was the poster boy or who meant more to the industry: it's about who was better. That can certainly play a role in your choice, but it's not the end all be all.


No, but being that guy for so long obviously puts them above a lot of the competition and does indeed make them better. If we were talking about pure in ring talent, it might be a different story with the likes of Malenko and Lance Storm making it to the final. We're talking all around performer, to the best of my knowledge, and being the poster boy and meaning a lot to the industry certainly plays a part of that.
  • 0

Image
Click image to get your tits blown off by my literary prowess.
User avatar
Daz Male
Referee
Ring General
Ring General
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 2885
Topics: 25
Age: 33
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Reputation: 1382

Re: ROUND ONE: "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2) vs. John Cena (7)

Postby Hanley! » Apr 03, '14, 1:29 pm

The problem I have with your argument, Daz, is that you voted for Cena. That might seem a bit of an obvious point of contention, but let me elaborate.

You haven't provided a single way in which John Cena is better than Randy Savage yet. You have defended Cena valiantly. You pointed out a number of his strengths, and have even pointed out a number of areas in which he's as good as Savage or almost as good as Savage. I don't really agree with those assessments, I think you're giving Cena a bit more credit than he deserves. But I still can't fault your reasoning there. The problem is that all those narrow losses still add up to Savage being a better performer than Cena.

I think you're coming at this argument from the perspective of Cena being underrated. At this point in his run, I don't particularly agree, but there's definitely a valid argument to be made there. And we've seen a number of people defending underrated wrestlers in the other polls already. In the Stone Cold vs Goldberg thread, I spent most of my time telling everyone how great Goldberg was. Tim posted up a great summary of what makes Lesnar such a great performer in the Kurt Angle vs Brock Lesnar thread.

But in spite of this, Tim still voted for Angle. I still voted for Austin. Why? Because they're better. And so is Savage.

That being said, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. Maybe you truly do believe that Cena is a superior performer. I just really can't tell why. In the skills department, Savage just outshines Cena.

You admitted yourself that Savage was better in the ring, though not by much. Cena's best matches don't compare to Savage's best matches (eg. the match against Steamboat at Wrestlemania 3). And while Cena has pulled a watchable match out of Khali, it's not quite so watchable or memorable as what Savage did with the Ultimate Warrior.

In terms of charisma, Savage is ahead of most people and certainly ahead of Cena. It's hard to back up a statement like that with something tangible, but I can do something of the sort: Savage's charisma got him over and kept him over. A big part of charisma is being ultimately likable and being able to win people over, regardless of what you're doing or saying. Savage had that talent. Cena didn't. Once he was on top, he quickly lost a large part of the audience and was never able to get them back.

You make the argument that Savage became as stale as Cena, but I don't think it's a fair comparison. People didn't get sick of Savage the same way they did with Cena. He had a routine, but at least people actually enjoyed it. That doesn't just make a difference, that makes all the difference. And while both of them played the one character for most of their careers, Savage's character was more interesting and lively, as opposed to Cena's which just became more and more vanilla and bland as the years went by.

It goes without saying that Savage was more beloved than Cena. He's also more famous - possibly just as a result of the period in which he was wrestling, but he's still more well known for sure. His drawing ability was impressive when he was given the chance to be the top guy (and he was a solid draw even when he wasn't in the top spot).

So what does that leave? Mic skills - and I don't think Cena truly rivals Savage here either. Again it's difficult to quantify, but I think he had more memorable promos. His promos made people more excited than Cena's. I'd have no problem betting that he talked more people into buildings. And all of that stuff matters a lot. Cena is just as comfortable in front of a crowd and he can cut a competent promo, but he's undermining angles with his nonchalance or irritating everyone with terrible humour more often than he's really engaging the crowd. Not to mention the fact that he spends so much promo time referencing how the crowd doesn't like him without ever quite forming an opinion on the matter. Overall, Savage's promos were just better than Cena's.

Now you already brought up that Cena has had to deal with worse booking and he's been given all this rubbish to say, but that's contradicting your main point. The only real point you've given in Cena's favour is that he's been the top man of the company for so long. That is 100% a booking decision. You're giving him leeway for the way he has been booked, while also giving him credit.

I don't think it's fair to say that Cena is better than Savage (or anyone else for that matter) simply because he's been the face of the company for so long. It would be one thing if he was particularly good at the job, but he hasn't been. Since he became the main man, ratings have declined steadily. Pay per view buys have declined steadily also. And as you've basically admitted, the quality has also declined. He's not representing the company as well as he could.

And while WWE have always been hesitant in creating new stars, no other face of the company has ever been as heavily supported by veterans and part-timers. Cena is technically the face of the WWE, but when it comes to making money on the big shows, they rarely rely on him. They look to the movie stars, celebrities and Attitude Era stars instead.

There have been a lot of comparisons to Hogan, so lets compare them in a little more depth. This will be Cena's 10th Wrestlemania as a main event guy. Hogan had roughly the same amount. So this seems like an even playing field.

How many times was Hogan in the Wrestlemania main event? Eight.
How many times was Cena in the Wrestlemania main event? Five.

How many times was Hogan's match the biggest draw of the night? Seven (conservatively).
How many times was Cena's match the biggest draw of the night? Four.

And most damning of all, with the possible exception of his match against Andre, Hogan was the bigger name in all of his huge Wrestlemania matches. Whereas Cena's match was only the biggest draw when the Rock or Triple H was involved. At least one of those guys was attracting a lot more buys than Cena himself.

All of that is going off on a bit of a tangent, but I think it illustrates two points that are central to this conversation:

1) John Cena's run at the top does not appropriately represent his worth as a main event draw.
2) If he had been competing directly against Hogan, Cena probably wouldn't have been capable of staying at Savage's level.

I know Savage is winning this poll, but honestly I'm surprised it's this close.
  • 25

User avatar
Hanley! Male
World Champion
World Champion
 
10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership10 years of membership
 
Posts: 5605
Topics: 165
Age: 37
Joined: Tue Oct 8, 2013
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Reputation: 3988

 

PreviousNext

Return to Squared Circle Classics

Who is Online Now?

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron
Reputation System ©'