Jump to content

Does The Rock deserve a shot at the WWE Title at the Royal Rumble?


yoshiking27

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Wow. Basicly the first page is about The Rock deserving it because he's the Rock. If he is the Rock, then if SCSA returns, does he deserve it? What ever happened to the No.1 contender matches? Last one I remembered was when Ceserao squashed Santino at least 3 times. Even Sheamus beat Del Rio 25 times, Del Rio is still the No.1 Contender

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Basicly the first page is about The Rock deserving it because he's the Rock. If he is the Rock, then if SCSA returns, does he deserve it? What ever happened to the No.1 contender matches? Last one I remembered was when Ceserao squashed Santino at least 3 times. Even Sheamus beat Del Rio 25 times, Del Rio is still the No.1 Contender

If Austin returns, and hes healthy, then yes, he deserves it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Basicly the first page is about The Rock deserving it because he's the Rock. If he is the Rock, then if SCSA returns, does he deserve it? What ever happened to the No.1 contender matches? Last one I remembered was when Ceserao squashed Santino at least 3 times. Even Sheamus beat Del Rio 25 times, Del Rio is still the No.1 Contender

 

When someone has done as much for this business? Yes. Austin, Triple H, The Undertaker, none of them have to 'earn' a damn thing. It comes with the status. Same with Cena when he's at a legendary status. Anyone that thinks differently doesn't know what they're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think because his last match was the Wrestlemania as far as I can remeber. He's probably not going to have a match until January. Ill say it again, Alex Riley will have a better shot at it.

 

Quite frankly, The Rock doesn't deserve it. Other than " 'cause he's The Rock", no one can give a logical nor plausable explanation to why The Rock deserves a shot at the WWE Title. Sure he's a legend, but his reputation doesn't make him qualified in today's WWE to have earned a shot at the WWE Title. It would be the same if Hulk Hogan, Austin, Shawn Michales, Mick Foley, etc, etc,etc....just waltz right in & says "I want WWE Title, give me title shot now", which is pretty much what The Rock has done & it's pretty much taking a giant shit over today's superstars who might've had their opportunity, maybe at the Royal Rumble, had The Rock not come in & taken it away from them. Sure it may be looked at as a financial "good for business" type deal, but other than ratings & money, this is nothing but bad business. I may not like Cena, but I think Cena said it best about The Rock, he's completely . That's right I said it, lets see how the marks handle that one. lol

 

Okay, well how about the fact that he beat John Cena at Wrestlemania? Isn't that a logical and plausable reason?

 

And even if he is a 'disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving bitch' it doesn't make him any less deserving of the belt.

 

Was it a Number One Contenders Match? Was a shot at the WWE Title being put on the line in that match? Last I heard from when I watched WM 28 on DVD, that wasn't the stipulation placed on the match at all. So no, a win over Cena(which lots of guys on the roster currently hold) doesn't make someone qualitied or deserving of a shot at the WWE Title. He's only getting the shot because of who he is, that's not logical or even a plausable reason for why she should get an opportunity at winning the WWE Title.

 

It may not be, but it does perfectly describe his "it's all about me" attitude & couldn't give a damn about anyone on the current roster. If he didn't put Cena over at WrestleMania, there's no way he puts Punk over & I can't see how anyone would expect The Rock to put him over.. I may not like Punk, but I would rather see the belt on a guy that'll at least be here every week, over a guy that is only here when it suits him. Plus it does more for the prestige of a title, for a current top guy, having an extended title reigning, than a guy just coming in & taking the title, just because he's The Rock. No one is expecting him to lose, I'd be surprised to see anyone take that bet, but I'd be even more surprised if he were to lose.

 

You act like you know The Rock personally or something. Your obvious dislike of The Rock is causing you to make BS statements ('disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving bitch'), so you should probably stop acting like you know him. Now I'm just going to assume here, that you being an Austin fan has something to do with your dislike of The Rock. Just an assumption, but I can't help but wonder. I apologise if I'm wrong.

 

Was it a Number One Contenders Match? Was a shot at the WWE Title being put on the line in that match? Last I heard from when I watched WM 28 on DVD, that wasn't the stipulation placed on the match at all.

 

That doesn't really matter. He beat the biggest face of the company in the biggest match of his and Cena's life. He said he's on a mission to capture the WWE championship, so that's what he's trying to EARN. He's EARNED the title shot, in my opinion.

 

He's only getting the shot because of who he is

 

I can't really deny that. Who he is? He's probably the biggest draw in wrestling. Him going after the top championship would bring prestige to the belt, and just as importantly, interest.

 

Plus it does more for the prestige of a title, for a current top guy, having an extended title reigning, than a guy just coming in & taking the title, just because he's The Rock.

 

You're acting like it's a fact that The Rock's going to win against the champion. You never know, an upset could occur. Punk is likely to be champion going into RR, I agree, but he may very well beat The Rock somehow.

 

And even if The Rock wins, that certainly would not be a bad thing. I'd love for The Rock to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think because his last match was the Wrestlemania as far as I can remeber. He's probably not going to have a match until January. Ill say it again, Alex Riley will have a better shot at it.

 

Quite frankly, The Rock doesn't deserve it. Other than " 'cause he's The Rock", no one can give a logical nor plausable explanation to why The Rock deserves a shot at the WWE Title. Sure he's a legend, but his reputation doesn't make him qualified in today's WWE to have earned a shot at the WWE Title. It would be the same if Hulk Hogan, Austin, Shawn Michales, Mick Foley, etc, etc,etc....just waltz right in & says "I want WWE Title, give me title shot now", which is pretty much what The Rock has done & it's pretty much taking a giant shit over today's superstars who might've had their opportunity, maybe at the Royal Rumble, had The Rock not come in & taken it away from them. Sure it may be looked at as a financial "good for business" type deal, but other than ratings & money, this is nothing but bad business. I may not like Cena, but I think Cena said it best about The Rock, he's completely . That's right I said it, lets see how the marks handle that one. lol

 

Okay, well how about the fact that he beat John Cena at Wrestlemania? Isn't that a logical and plausable reason?

 

And even if he is a 'disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving bitch' it doesn't make him any less deserving of the belt.

 

Was it a Number One Contenders Match? Was a shot at the WWE Title being put on the line in that match? Last I heard from when I watched WM 28 on DVD, that wasn't the stipulation placed on the match at all. So no, a win over Cena(which lots of guys on the roster currently hold) doesn't make someone qualitied or deserving of a shot at the WWE Title. He's only getting the shot because of who he is, that's not logical or even a plausable reason for why she should get an opportunity at winning the WWE Title.

 

It may not be, but it does perfectly describe his "it's all about me" attitude & couldn't give a damn about anyone on the current roster. If he didn't put Cena over at WrestleMania, there's no way he puts Punk over & I can't see how anyone would expect The Rock to put him over.. I may not like Punk, but I would rather see the belt on a guy that'll at least be here every week, over a guy that is only here when it suits him. Plus it does more for the prestige of a title, for a current top guy, having an extended title reigning, than a guy just coming in & taking the title, just because he's The Rock. No one is expecting him to lose, I'd be surprised to see anyone take that bet, but I'd be even more surprised if he were to lose.

 

1.)You act like you know The Rock personally or something. Your obvious dislike of The Rock is causing you to make BS statements ('disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving bitch'), so you should probably stop acting like you know him. Now I'm just going to assume here, that you being an Austin fan has something to do with your dislike of The Rock. Just an assumption, but I can't help but wonder. I apologise if I'm wrong.

 

Was it a Number One Contenders Match? Was a shot at the WWE Title being put on the line in that match? Last I heard from when I watched WM 28 on DVD, that wasn't the stipulation placed on the match at all.

 

2)That doesn't really matter. He beat the biggest face of the company in the biggest match of his and Cena's life. He said he's on a mission to capture the WWE championship, so that's what he's trying to EARN. He's EARNED the title shot, in my opinion.

 

He's only getting the shot because of who he is

 

I can't really deny that. Who he is? He's probably the biggest draw in wrestling. 3)Him going after the top championship would bring prestige to the belt, and just as importantly, interest.

 

Plus it does more for the prestige of a title, for a current top guy, having an extended title reigning, than a guy just coming in & taking the title, just because he's The Rock.

 

4) You're acting like it's a fact that The Rock's going to win against the champion. You never know, an upset could occur. Punk is likely to be champion going into RR, I agree, but he may very well beat The Rock somehow.

 

And even if The Rock wins, that certainly would not be a bad thing. I'd love for The Rock to win.

 

1. Name once where I ever said that I did. I'll save you time, I didn't, stop assuming that I did. Just because I stated an opinion of the guy, which more than just myself have, I guess in your eyes, that makes me hate the guy? Wrong. I don't have any issue with The Rock, I find him to be one the funniest superstars to be honest with you & a big fan of his mic work. It's not the first time, nor is it the last time that a comment like that will be made about The Rock, it's a false assumption on your part that to think that I do have something against the guy, which I don't. I guess at least one mark took the bait, like I predicted they would after reading my comment lol.

 

2. And that proves he's deserving how? So I guess by that logic, if any superstar just debuts & defeats the face of the company they get to dictate when & where they get a WWE Championship match? Yea, I think many people would laugh at anyone doing that, but because he's The Rock, that changes everything right? pfff smh

 

3. As stated already, by putting himself over the rest of the company & taking away opportunities from today's talent? Newsflash The Rock retired 8 years ago & has had only two matches since, but yet that is deserving of a WWE Title match? I don't think so.

 

4. So The Rock doesn't put over the face of the company, but decides that the 2nd or 3rd best guy deserves to be put over by him? Come on, Rock's gotta bigger ego than that, I know you're just playing devil's advocate there, but I'd be shocked if Rock put over Punk(if he's still champion around then). And when The Rock wins(which I think is very probably that he will), what then, what does it do for business? Gain exposure? Sure ok, I get that, but what does it do for the company? What does it do for the current stars, other than set a bad example that you can retire & come back, and win the WWE Title, just because you're a big name, like it's your "birth right" or it's what you're entitled to. I'm sorry, but it doesn't really do anything, by comparison CM Punk's reign right now does more for the prestige of the title, over a reign of 3 months that The Rock would have(and by not being there every week as champion). I'm not the biggest CM Punk fan in the world by any means, mostly everyone here can tell you that, but I'd rather see a guy whose here every week with the title, then a part time guy, like The Rock have the WWE title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people are saying that when the rock will wins the title, he wont be there to defend it :/, im gonna laugh my ass when he will be there for the whole 3 months of road to wm ...

 

 

some people are idiots, its like vince doesnt know what he is doing, do you all think that he would let the rock win the title and wont be there for the ppvs and raw?!! because i think vince knows what he is doing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Name once where I ever said that I did. I'll save you time, I didn't, stop assuming that I did.

 

he's completely disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving b****

 

It just came across that way to me. It's a pretty personal thing to say, though. You call him that (well Cena did, and you quoted) yet you say you don't have an issue with him? That's a bit contradictory, which is why I got the idea that you didn't like him.

 

I guess at least one mark took the bait, like I predicted they would after reading my comment lol.

 

Umm...I'm not a Rock mark. I'm a fan of his, but I think being a mark is different. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

Well I'm not going to argue your fourth point, because we don't know what will happen. Should be interesting, though.

 

Would you have an issue with The Rock winning the title if he showed up regularly during his reign?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HELL NO.

 

If Rock was actually sticking around like he promised, I wouldn't mind. But he's had two matches in the past two years. This is like saying Bret Hart deserved to win the US title after his return.

 

Rock earned every title he received during his full time run. But this is just Vince trying to appeal to him to stick around and make him more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people are saying that when the rock will wins the title, he wont be there to defend it :/,  im gonna laugh my ass when he will be there for the whole 3 months of road to wm ...

 

 

some people are idiots, its like vince doesnt know what he is doing, do you all think that he would let the rock win the title and wont be there for the ppvs and raw?!!  because i think vince knows what he is doing

 

If he knows what he's doing, then why would he leave young talent unrecognized? Why would he have the tag team division crumple? Why let the Diva Division rot. And worse of all, why would Vince let John Cena stay a face? The last one was just me joking but serious about the others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Name once where I ever said that I did. I'll save you time, I didn't, stop assuming that I did.

 

he's completely disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving b****

 

1. It just came across that way to me. It's a pretty personal thing to say, though. You call him that (well Cena did, and you quoted) yet you say you don't have an issue with him? That's a bit contradictory, which is why I got the idea that you didn't like him.

 

I guess at least one mark took the bait, like I predicted they would after reading my comment lol.

 

2. Umm...I'm not a Rock mark. I'm a fan of his, but I think being a mark is different. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

Well I'm not going to argue your fourth point, because we don't know what will happen. Should be interesting, though.

 

Would you have an issue with The Rock winning the title if he showed up regularly during his reign?

 

1. Did you even read what I bolded for you? You said "You act like you know the guy", and I responded with, name one time I said that I did & that was your response? Also, I was quoting Cena with that quote, so even though I agree, it wasn't how I would personally phrase it.

 

2. JUst seemed that way, hence why I mentioned the intentional bait lol. I appologize, that you're not lol.

 

3. I wouldn't have a problem if there was a 100 percent guarantee that Rock would be there every week, I mean the WWE Champion is supposed to be the focal point of the show, if he's not going to be there every week, and only half ass or "mail in" in performance, so to speak, then I would rather see Punk just keep the title. I just feel it's a bad business move to see someone who would be champion, only show up when it suits him. It disrespects the company & does nothing to help the championship itself, but yea...if he were to show up every week, I'd be in more support of it. Right now though, I'm totally against it, especially after his attitude towards his own match at WM against Cena, in the 6 weeks of build up for WM, he showed up only twice. Twice? Are you serous? That's a big reason why I'm against it right now, until he can prove otherwise that he can be there as WWE Champion, like a champion should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Fair enough. So how long until CM Punk breaks Cena's and someone else's (forgot who) title reigns?

 

You mean longest title reign? I think Nash(Diesel) held it for over a year & Cena held the WWE title the longest for like 22 out of 24 months(I forget how long consecutively), but he's already at number 13 of longest title reigns in WWE history, so he's slowly making his way up the list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Fair enough. So how long until CM Punk breaks Cena's and someone else's (forgot who) title reigns?

 

You mean longest title reign? I think Nash(Diesel) held it for over a year & Cena held the WWE title the longest for like 22 out of 24 months(I forget how long consecutively), but he's already at number 13 of longest title reigns in WWE history, so he's slowly making his way up the list.

 

CM Punk needs 2000 more days to make it close to the record for longest reign and 4000 more days to set the combined title reign.

 

Longest single and combine chapionship reign: Bruno Sammartino

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5. I don't always agree with Cena, but that was one moment where I was forced to, because it's hard arguement to counter. Evidence? You want evidence, just look no further than CM Punk's own words, that Rock half the time doesn't even acknowledge other superstars, unless they are/were in his "inner circle" or from the attitude era(I.e. HHH, Taker, Stone Cold, etc). He tends to be a bit of seperatist backstage & that can come across as being very egotistical, especially if you don't take the time to say a simple hello to another fellow superstars, regardless of rank on the card. Do we all forget when CM Punk said himself that he put his hand out for The Rock to shake it & Rock completely ignored it, like he was too good to shake another human being's hand. I'm sorry, but that's ego right there. That's just one example I can think of off the top of my head, I'm sure there are others, if I wanted to knit pick over every current superstar reaction/interaction with The Rock. But I guess CM Punk's experience, amoung other superstars personal account must be baseless as well, huh? :rolleyes:

cmpunktherock-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't think because his last match was the Wrestlemania as far as I can remeber. He's probably not going to have a match until January. Ill say it again, Alex Riley will have a better shot at it.

 

Quite frankly, The Rock doesn't deserve it. Other than " 'cause he's The Rock", no one can give a logical nor plausable explanation to why The Rock deserves a shot at the WWE Title. Sure he's a legend, but his reputation doesn't make him qualified in today's WWE to have earned a shot at the WWE Title. It would be the same if Hulk Hogan, Austin, Shawn Michales, Mick Foley, etc, etc,etc....just waltz right in & says "I want WWE Title, give me title shot now", which is pretty much what The Rock has done & it's pretty much taking a giant shit over today's superstars who might've had their opportunity, maybe at the Royal Rumble, had The Rock not come in & taken it away from them. Sure it may be looked at as a financial "good for business" type deal, but other than ratings & money, this is nothing but bad business. I may not like Cena, but I think Cena said it best about The Rock, he's completely . That's right I said it, lets see how the marks handle that one. lol

 

Okay, well how about the fact that he beat John Cena at Wrestlemania? Isn't that a logical and plausable reason?

 

And even if he is a 'disingenuous, egomanical, self centered, attention wanting, spotlight craving bitch' it doesn't make him any less deserving of the belt.

 

If the talent got over better then maybe they wouldnt need to rely on wrestlers from the past.

 

Cena will get his mania win back come next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...