Thunder – June 14, 2000: The Original John Cena

You may also like...

14 Responses

  1. Thomas Hall says:

    Somehow I knew I was going to get into this again.

    It’s true that no one has been on top as long as Cena, but how many people come out to a reaction, albeit strong or weak, other than him? Now yes some of that is due to the booking, but a lot of it is due to Cena being someone whose charisma draws a natural reaction. That’s Cena’s talent, not the company holding others down.

    As for the wins/losses, yeah Cena wins a lot because that’s how you book a top face. Hogan almost never lost and he made the company a fortune. When Cena loses, it means something. It meant something when he lost to Del Rio and it meant something when Lesnar beat him. I certainly agree that the Wyatt feud was stupid but Cena does WAY more good for the company than bad.

    Simply put: Cena gets treated differently because he’s different than everyone else. We’ve never seen anything like him with the longevity on top and so much exposure so it’s really not fair to judge him like you would someone else.

    Above all else though: Cena is the kind of guy that is going to be missed when he’s gone. I really don’t want to know what’s going to happen when he finally hangs it up because there’s going to be a BIG hole to be filled and I don’t know how many people it’s going to take to do it.

    • John says:

      Well said.

      • ted says:

        It’s going to take one person to fill the cena void. The thing is John Cena isn’t special. He homogenized and pasteurized for your protection. Everything he says and does seems so corporate That’s why people don’t like him. True he works hard, but everyone works hard in the wwe. That does not make him special. The fact is twice now we’ve had an opportunity to try someone else as the lead babyface in the company. Ego and injury have prevented that.

        I don’t even dislike Cena, But saying he can’t be compared because he’s managed to politick himself to the top for a decade is ridiculous.

        So the Wyatt thing was stupid we can agree on that. What about the Owens thing? The Russev Thing? The Rollins thing? Again I’m not saying he has to lose all the time but had he just let one of those people have the last laugh in their respective feuds, That would have helped establish them.

        No just getting in the ring with Cena is not the privilege. You have to get the better of him for it to matter. Look at Kevin Owens he beats John Cena in his first match with him ever. People were stunned. Perhaps Owens is on the same level or even above John. No wait Cena beat him twice after to regain the status quo. I noticed lately you kb are of the opinion that Cena will only be appreciated when he’s gone. I can’t speak for everybody, but personally i’ll be happy when he finally stop relying on the Cena corpse.

        Perhaps that day is here?

        • Thomas Hall says:

          I’m going to reply to this whole thing with two sentences.

          John Cena is indeed special. If he wasn’t, why hasn’t WWE made an army of him?

          Ok maybe just most of the thing.

          Rusev was built to lose to a big time face. That’s been the case with every monster undefeated heel since monster undefeated heels became a thing. You build him up as unstoppable and then someone beats him in a big showdown. That’s how wrestling works. Cena doing it gave the title a rub, which was the entire idea.

          As for Owens, his first match in WWE was a clean win over John Cena. You don’t get much bigger of a debut than that and Owens seems to be doing just fine since then.

  2. ted says:

    The cena complaint is valid he does win an absurd amount.

    • Thomas Hall says:

      No, it’s really not valid as he loses a lot. And no, we’re not getting into this for the millionth time.

      • ted says:

        Have we got into this before?

        • Thomas Hall says:

          I don’t know if you and I have but I’ve debated it so much over the years that I’m sick of it. It would be the same points over and over again and I really don’t need to rehash them one more time.

    • Rocko says:

      Look at Austin’s 1999 record. You’ll never complain about Cena again.

      • ted says:

        I’ll complain about Cena doing things I don’t like, or agree with. Regardless of what other wrestlers win lose records are.

        • Rocko says:

          You took my point a bit too literally but Cena is not the only one who has been booked the way he is.

          When top guys lose, it should mean something. If they lose all the time then it won’t matter.

        • ted says:

          True Cena is not the only person to be booked strong. Though I think it’s fair to say that no one has been booked this strong for this long. I’m not saying he should lose all the time. But to say that just because he’s lost a couple of matches this year, somehow makes up for all the feuds he’s outright won. It’s not balanced if you catch my meaning. Yes it should mean something when top guys lose. But Cena could lose every match fora year straight with the way he’s booked and it wouldn’t diminish him at all. Even when he does lose he doesn’t really lose. I hope I’m being clear. Sorry if i’m not.

  3. #MrScissorsKick says:

    LOL, Charlotte has a better winning percentage than Cena does.

    Charlotte: 84.2%

    Cena: 77.1%

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.