About A New Day.....I Don't Like Them and Here's Why

[Makavelli Cobain]

I gather they're atrio of holymen? A reverand(Langston) and his deacons(Kingston and Woods)?

 

Dosen't this sound familiar? Revereand D-Von and Deacon Bautista anyone? I didn't too much like them back then, and still don't now.

 

I only words I can use to describe either team/trio are they're like The Beatles; I like each member seperatly, but collectivly The Beatles have a few good songs and the above team(s)/Trio(s) have a few good moments but ultimatly are just not good.

 

All things said, D-Von and Bautista were heels and I enjoyed booing them while Langston, Woods, and Kingston are faces...I think, however that gimmick would be a great heel gimmick like D-Von and Bautista.

 

 

[Willows Way]

If you think about it booing Reverands isn't exactly what's supposed to happen lol. To me the gimmick might be really corny but all 3 guys have been doing well in ring especially with all their tag moves so I can deal with the gimmick.

[tonshaad1230]

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

[Makavelli Cobain]

If you think about it booing Reverands isn't exactly what's supposed to happen lol. To me the gimmick might be really corny but all 3 guys have been doing well in ring especially with all their tag moves so I can deal with the gimmick.

 

I know, but just tonight I heard more than a few boos, I think the fans will get tire of it real quick like when they got tired of being told to BOlieve.

 

That was corny.

[AnonymousNightmare]

Stop the damn complaining, The New Day is new and hasn't even begone yet give it a chance.

[Anno Domini.]

I actually like The New Day, it's about time we saw a religious gimmick that was fun and not booked as heel.

[Kelevra*]

Where the hell is everyone getting this religious idea from? Am I missing something here?

 

It seems more like they're using a motivational speaker gimmick. I see nothing "religious" or "reverend" about it.

[doug625]

Anything that involves Big E immediately loses my attention. His ring work is just enough to get by. His mic skills are atrocious. I like Kofi but he has been irrelevant for a while. I enjoyed Xavier Woods as Consequences Creed, not so much anymore. I think this will be a flash in a pan.

[Black Dahlia]

The New Day is WWE's new flavor of the month. Like Brodus Clay, Fandango, Adam Estrogen, and Los Matadores they'll start off strong for a few weeks than the fans will get tired of the act. Than the WWE will put the act into the undercard and make them jobbers. Some months will go by then we will see reports about WWE releasing these guys

[Counting Lights]

I'm enjoying New Day, but as Dahlia mentioned, I'm not sure they'll stay relevant very long...

[Lyriqz ✪]

Everything with Woods in it is trash.

[Captain Wallie B]

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

 

They aren't going to support something if it doesn't entertain them.

Anyway I honestly think they'd have done just fine without the church stuff. Just have the characters be themselves and still go out and have exciting match ups.

 

 

[Ayatollah]

 

WWE should have headed the Nation of Domination route with R-Truth as their leader. It would have been so much better than this New Day "we're happy to be here" stuff. They could still do it. R-Truth could ask them where appeasing to the crowd has gotten them, and tell them he can take them where they all need to be.

 

I said this in the WWE Universe thread. In the long run New Day will run it's course (as Dahlia mentioned). That's literally the only problem with the group. I think the NOD route would be a hell of a lot more entertaining. They could be the next dominant team in the WWE.

[Intentz™]

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

[Crazy.]

I think it should have just been Woods and Kofi. Big E deserves better. As for the stable, I think it's decent.

[Willows Way]

I will say that I would be interested to see them as tag team champions just for the simple fact that it looks like they could do the Freebird rule of any two of the three can defend it. Then call up Ascension to take it from them since Ascension I can see having no problem taking on 3 guys at once if necessary. Having rotating guys in the matches keeps rematches and shit fresh as well.

[Makavelli Cobain]

 

 

WWE should have headed the Nation of Domination route with R-Truth as their leader. It would have been so much better than this New Day "we're happy to be here" stuff. They could still do it. R-Truth could ask them where appeasing to the crowd has gotten them, and tell them he can take them where they all need to be.

 

I said this in the WWE Universe thread. In the long run New Day will run it's course (as Dahlia mentioned). That's literally the only problem with the group. I think the NOD route would be a hell of a lot more entertaining. They could be the next dominant team in the WWE.

 

Yeah escpeciaaly with Mark henry still with the company, Rock on on good terms, and Faarooq popping up every now and then they could've ran the show and had past members make appearences from time to time.

 

[.Sy™]

I think it should have just been Woods and Kofi. Big E deserves better. As for the stable, I think it's decent.

 

Big E is my favorite member because he can finally show personality and the hilarious side we could only see on social media. I didn't like how serious he was as a singles wrestler. But eventually yeah, he should get a good push and debut the 5-count once the stable dissolves.

 

I think the stable is great. Kofi can show personality, Woods can shine and the trio is just gold together. I hope they'll turn heel sometime next year when the time is right.

[Crazy.]

 

 

I think it should have just been Woods and Kofi. Big E deserves better. As for the stable, I think it's decent.

Big E is my favorite member because he can finally show personality and the hilarious side we could only see on social media. I didn't like how serious he was as a singles wrestler. But eventually yeah, he should get a good push and debut the 5-count once the stable dissolves.

 

I think the stable is great. Kofi can show personality, Woods can shine and the trio is just gold together. I hope they'll turn heel sometime next year when the time is right.

Oh yeah, I certainly agree in the respect that this gives him much more freedom to be his natural self. This current character with the beast he was in the ring should have always been him from the beginning.

[CarDaddyPlease]

 

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

 

 

Its not about eating shit on it, its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action". It may not be everything, but with every new gimmick that shows up we get another 600 posts and tweets and comments about how "this is stupid, they ruined a great wrestler, why don't they just let them not have a gimmick and just be themselves and let them wrestle!"

 

 

Devils Advocate side, every time we enjoy something WWE messes it up: Dean Ambrose forced crazy, Roman Reigns forced intensity, Cody Rhodes doing well switched to Stardust

[Intentz™]

 

 

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

 

 

Its not about eating shit on it, its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action". It may not be everything, but with every new gimmick that shows up we get another 600 posts and tweets and comments about how "this is stupid, they ruined a great wrestler, why don't they just let them not have a gimmick and just be themselves and let them wrestle!"

 

 

Devils Advocate side, every time we enjoy something WWE messes it up: Dean Ambrose forced crazy, Roman Reigns forced intensity, Cody Rhodes doing well switched to Stardust

 

WWE is not entertaining anymore, thats my opinion. If that many people feel the same way about certain wrestlers then there's probably a good reason for it. People look for different things in wrestling and this place would be much better if we were all a little more tolerant of other peoples views. I haven't watched wrestling regularly for two years. Just every now n then I tune into a couple of big PPV's but I still have an opinion. It's got nothing to do with the old IWC indy mark arguement, I don't even think that point is valid anymore in today's wrestling world. That's just some bullshit the WWE apologists to come up with to circumvent responding to actual criticsm.

[CarDaddyPlease]

 

 

 

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

 

 

Its not about eating shit on it, its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action". It may not be everything, but with every new gimmick that shows up we get another 600 posts and tweets and comments about how "this is stupid, they ruined a great wrestler, why don't they just let them not have a gimmick and just be themselves and let them wrestle!"

 

 

Devils Advocate side, every time we enjoy something WWE messes it up: Dean Ambrose forced crazy, Roman Reigns forced intensity, Cody Rhodes doing well switched to Stardust

 

WWE is not entertaining anymore, thats my opinion. If that many people feel the same way about certain wrestlers then there's probably a good reason for it. People look for different things in wrestling and this place would be much better if we were all a little more tolerant of other peoples views. I haven't watched wrestling regularly for two years. Just every now n then I tune into a couple of big PPV's but I still have an opinion. It's got nothing to do with the old IWC indy mark arguement, I don't even think that point is valid anymore in today's wrestling world. That's just some bullshit the WWE apologists to come up with to circumvent responding to actual criticsm.

 

 

Pretty ironic that you'd try and paint me as someone using the Indy mark argument and then slap the WWE apologist argument down. The fact is, that many people don't feel the same way outside the confines of talking every day online about wrestling like we do. I'm very tolerant of other people's opinions, obviously you aren't very receptive to any kind of idea other than "WWE sucks, thats the fact". That's the very clear observation that you can make browsing forums and twitter, people want half the PWG roster in the WWE and for them to be allowed to do all the same spots they do now. Again, its not everyone, but it creeps up more and more every time we get a less than realistic gimmick in the WWE.

[Intentz™]

 

 

 

 

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

 

 

Its not about eating shit on it, its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action". It may not be everything, but with every new gimmick that shows up we get another 600 posts and tweets and comments about how "this is stupid, they ruined a great wrestler, why don't they just let them not have a gimmick and just be themselves and let them wrestle!"

 

 

Devils Advocate side, every time we enjoy something WWE messes it up: Dean Ambrose forced crazy, Roman Reigns forced intensity, Cody Rhodes doing well switched to Stardust

 

WWE is not entertaining anymore, thats my opinion. If that many people feel the same way about certain wrestlers then there's probably a good reason for it. People look for different things in wrestling and this place would be much better if we were all a little more tolerant of other peoples views. I haven't watched wrestling regularly for two years. Just every now n then I tune into a couple of big PPV's but I still have an opinion. It's got nothing to do with the old IWC indy mark arguement, I don't even think that point is valid anymore in today's wrestling world. That's just some bullshit the WWE apologists to come up with to circumvent responding to actual criticsm.

 

 

Pretty ironic that you'd try and paint me as someone using the Indy mark argument and then slap the WWE apologist argument down. The fact is, that many people don't feel the same way outside the confines of talking every day online about wrestling like we do. I'm very tolerant of other people's opinions, obviously you aren't very receptive to any kind of idea other than "WWE sucks, thats the fact". That's the very clear observation that you can make browsing forums and twitter, people want half the PWG roster in the WWE and for them to be allowed to do all the same spots they do now. Again, its not everyone, but it creeps up more and more every time we get a less than realistic gimmick in the WWE.

 

''its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action".'' I work with the quotes I'm given, the response I got made me think you were being overly general. Alls I'm saying is I don't care about indy wrestler 9000. The problem I have is that the wrestlers are far too micro managed in WWE and this is why we getting shitty characters with no depth at all, and none of it is really natural. If most of them were given a free reign then I think the product would be better. We also need more wrestlers playing politics. The IWC isn't a stigma as much as many people think it is, I'm just a wrestling fan, I don't want to be labelled as anything. It's the WWE brass that look down on ''internet'' fans and some people just eat that shit up and follow it like sheep. I wasn't specifically calling you out or anything so don't take it personally, wasn't painting you as anything.

[CarDaddyPlease]

 

 

 

 

 

Why did I think this was going to happen...? The minute WWE gives us something a little bit new or "refreshing", that doesn't involve Cena, people bitch about not liking them. Yet I'm the pessimist?

Why should people shut up and eat shit if they don't like something? It's purely subjective and there were clear reasons given as to why he's not impressed.

 

Logic score : 0/10

 

Try harder next time.

 

 

Its not about eating shit on it, its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action". It may not be everything, but with every new gimmick that shows up we get another 600 posts and tweets and comments about how "this is stupid, they ruined a great wrestler, why don't they just let them not have a gimmick and just be themselves and let them wrestle!"

 

 

Devils Advocate side, every time we enjoy something WWE messes it up: Dean Ambrose forced crazy, Roman Reigns forced intensity, Cody Rhodes doing well switched to Stardust

 

WWE is not entertaining anymore, thats my opinion. If that many people feel the same way about certain wrestlers then there's probably a good reason for it. People look for different things in wrestling and this place would be much better if we were all a little more tolerant of other peoples views. I haven't watched wrestling regularly for two years. Just every now n then I tune into a couple of big PPV's but I still have an opinion. It's got nothing to do with the old IWC indy mark arguement, I don't even think that point is valid anymore in today's wrestling world. That's just some bullshit the WWE apologists to come up with to circumvent responding to actual criticsm.

 

 

Pretty ironic that you'd try and paint me as someone using the Indy mark argument and then slap the WWE apologist argument down. The fact is, that many people don't feel the same way outside the confines of talking every day online about wrestling like we do. I'm very tolerant of other people's opinions, obviously you aren't very receptive to any kind of idea other than "WWE sucks, thats the fact". That's the very clear observation that you can make browsing forums and twitter, people want half the PWG roster in the WWE and for them to be allowed to do all the same spots they do now. Again, its not everyone, but it creeps up more and more every time we get a less than realistic gimmick in the WWE.

 

''its about the fact that nearly 90% of the people posting on the internet about wrestling seems to hate anything that isn't "Super Indy Wrestler 9000 now with PWG spot action".'' I work with the quotes I'm given, the response I got made me think you were being overly general. Alls I'm saying is I don't care about indy wrestler 9000. The problem I have is that the wrestlers are far too micro managed in WWE and this is why we getting shitty characters with no depth at all, and none of it is really natural. If most of them were given a free reign then I think the product would be better. We also need more wrestlers playing politics. The IWC isn't a stigma as much as many people think it is, I'm just a wrestling fan, I don't want to be labelled as anything. It's the WWE brass that look down on ''internet'' fans and some people just eat that shit up and follow it like sheep. I wasn't specifically calling you out or anything so don't take it personally, wasn't painting you as anything.

 

 

I wasn't saying you specifically are looking for Indy Wrestler 9000, I was merely commenting on the general conversation and you saying "why should people shut up and eat shit....". Was I overly general? Yeah, but I don't know how to narrow it down because it really is more so the internet that runs into this as most fans i meet irl barely know who Kevin Steen is. I don't look down on the IWC, i'm a part of it so that would be stupid of me, I just think that a majority of hate that gets thrown around in regards to gimmicks and character are based in the fact that a lot of people just want someone without a character wrestling circles around everyone. Free Reign is super nice, but without a character I think it becomes way too bland. I'm not looking for micro management and forced gimmicks, but I think gimmicks have to be in place to enjoy it at all.