http://sports.yahoo.com/news/john-cena-make-a-wish-300-requests-pro-wrestling-wwe.html;_ylt=AjcIdoC71DZMU3LI7zUaGVG37ux_;_ylu=X3oDMTVkYm1yZXIxBGNjb2RlA3ZzaGFyZWFnMnVwcmVzdARtaXQDTWl4ZWQgTGlzdCBOZXdzIEZvciBZb3UEcGtnAzAwZDRjZGE4LTkyMDktMzAyZS1hYTE2LTY5YzAzMzJhY2I0YQRwb3MDNQRzZWMDTWVkaWFCTGlzdE1peGVkTmV3c0ZvcllvdUNBVGVtcAR2ZXIDNjU2ZmNkZjEtYmNhNC0xMWUxLWIzYjgtZDZlNDNjMjVhZDI1;_ylg=X3oDMTJvdjJvZ2E3BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDOWIxYTcyYzQtNDhlYy0zNTdkLWEwOWMtZTZhNjZiYWFiNmY2BHBzdGNhdANuY2FhZgRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2U-;_ylv=3
And that is why Cena will never turn heel. Got to admit whether you like Cena or not that's pretty cool.
Also, pretty funny to note that Hogan is one of the only other athletes with over 200 wishes granted.
No one ever said Cena wasn't an awesome guy, he's just an incredibly stale character who's booked like Superman.
I fail to see why doing good things in real life has anything to do with loving or hating someone in wrestling.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if there's a distinction, but I'm not even sure Cena's character is the problem....it's the storylines he's booked in. Cena/Punk was awesome, and Cena didn't need to do any major adjustments to his character (unlike Cena/Rock, where Cena at times needed to revert to his former crass personality).
ReplyDeleteCome to think of it, Cena's character is really only as interesting and exciting as the person he's up against. Big Show doing promo after promo about how he doesn't have to smile any more is not interesting. And I know Cena has a reputation for taking his opponents too lightly behind the mic, but the guy is also WAY more willing to show ass than others in his position (his weaknesses are brought up in virtually every feud he's in. Compare that to Triple H, who needed to immediately get the upper hand on Paul Heyman this past week on Raw).
When he's been playing the same character for nearly a decade now, they need to be more conscious of which characters bring out the best in him.
Because these Make a Wish visits aren't to 20 year old jaded fans. They're to young children who DO see a connection between doing good things in real life and loving them in wrestling.
ReplyDeleteRight on about the comparison to HHH on the mic. Good lord, there was a period from late 2000 to mid 2005 where everyone had to pay homage to him in interviews/promos. There were numerous times where his opponents essentially said things like, "I respect everything you've done in THIS BUSINESS...you ARE that damn good...you ARE the king of kings...there's a reason you're the champ and have dominated so long," to preface every one-on-one interaction between the opponents. It was almost like they were all saying that HHH was the best and they were hoping they'd get lucky for one night and get a fluke victory. And then there was Sheamus last year (maybe around the time of the "walk out" angle) where he felt compelled to point out that HHH kick his arse at Wrestlemania the year before.
ReplyDeleteOnto the underlying topic here. Yes, what these guys do outside of the ring does affect the way we perceive them. When people are knocking Orton, do they even point to the in-ring stuff anymore (since he's been a solid hand since 2007)? When people are talking up Cena, don't they usually point to his Make-a-Wish background? Sometimes the actor makes so much of a dominant impression that we cheer or boo his character/role based on the outside stuff. I think that's a-okay. I also think separating the actor from his work/art is fine, too.
I know that many of you won't agree with my example, but I think Alec Baldwin is a pretty funny guy. But I find it hard to separate his characters from the actor who called his daughter a little pig and bitch, the guy who punches out cameramen, the guy who had whispers about emotional/physical abuse with Kim Bassinger, and the guy who is a smug liberal douche (bear in mind, I'm an independent on the political scene and believe there are conservative douches as well). So...I don't really watch his stuff. I can't support him or his stuff...unless it's the puppet version and leader of F.A.G. in Team America.
This has absolutely nothing to do with why they won't turn Cena heel. WWE is a publicly traded for-profit corporation. Not that he ever needed it, but Vince has a responsibility to his shareholders to make them as much money as possible. If he thought that turning Cena heel would make him more money, he would do it in a heartbeat. Vince is, and always has been, in the business of making money, not easing the suffering of dying children. If those two pursuits happen to coincide, great, free PR. If not, Vince is siding with the money, not the kids. Cena will eventually turn heel someday, and it'll have nothing to do with kids, anymore than it does today.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. I don't think this is the sole reason, but it is a very big one. WWE has a lot of unofficial corporate responsibilities. Watch old VHS's from the 80's and you'll see that even then, WWE was involved with Make-A-Wish. It's one of the things they get great PR from, and with Cena so heavily involved, it would be tough to lose him in that role if there isn't anybody that could realistically replace him to that extent.
ReplyDeleteEven Superman sees how Cena is booked and is like, "hey man...at least I job to kryptonite."
ReplyDeleteThis news inspired me to rise against hate.
ReplyDeleteHe's playing a character on television, people need to stop acting like him doing charity work is somehow going to be affected by him playing heel. Just ask the Rock how he screwed up his Hollywood career by playing an "asshole from Hollywood" during his 2003 run.
ReplyDeleteSo you're equating the way Hollywood (an industry built on people playing roles) reacted to the Rock playing a character on a wrestling show to an 8 year old who watches wrestling and probably sees "John Cena the character" and perceives that to be "John Cena the person"?
ReplyDeleteI think anyone here (myself included) would rather be entertained by interesting characters than have things dictated by the way the company and its characters are perceived by the outside world -- but I think you're fooling yourself if you don't believe John Cena turning heel would impact the charity appearances he makes....particularly to the young children that make up a large part of that.
Guess what wrestling is? An industry built on people playing roles.
ReplyDelete"And that is why Cena will never turn heel""Also, pretty funny to note that Hogan is one of the only other athletes with over 200 wishes granted."So in the second to last paragraph, you conclude that, because Cena does all of these Make-a-Wish appearances, he will never turn heel.Then you tack on a final sentence where you mention one other wrestler who has done a comparable amount of appearance...and also went on to have one of the most famous heel turns of all time, thus disproving everything you've written beforehand.Does Scott and the poster enjoy wasting our time?
ReplyDeleteI said after Mania, I really think Cena's beyond the point where a simple heel turn will even be what he needs. His faults and the problems people have had with his character have been laid so bare and made so obvious to everyone over the last year or so that at this point, having him actually turn on the fans would just be cheap heat. What they need is to deepen the story. Explain how the complicated relationship he has with his audience affects him. Let the other faces start to brush him off or turn against him. Let his allegiance be in doubt. If they're willing to risk it, let him go the Sting route and start taking time off, just sitting in the back or something and watching while everyone questions his character. And then find an angle where Cena has to be selfless in a way he might not personally agree with. I don't know exactly what the best way to go would be, but think something like Austin saving Stephanie from being married to Taker. Rather than be the white knight saving the day, he's Philip Marlowe: He's doing what's right even when the people he's saving don't deserve it. Then when he wants to be a smirking smartass, it will feel more in tune with his character. Meanwhile, he can still kick ass and win matches, and Make a Wish kids will still like him.
ReplyDeleteI still knock Orton for his ring work cause he still sucks.
ReplyDeleteCena jobs to The Rock. The Rock is cooler than Kryptonite!
ReplyDeleteYes, but we're not talking about people within the wrestling industry. We're talking about the people the Make a Wish community. Which is young children who may not fully grasp that.
ReplyDeleteI think part of this is Chris Benoit's fault. After that tragedy, WWE has needed a clean-cut hero to bring in good publicity from the mainstream media, whether it be for Make-A-Wish, Be A Star or whatever. And Cena fits the bill as no one else can do it right now. HHH, Randy Orton and CM Punk just aren't marketable the same way as Captain Jean Shorts.
ReplyDeleteAnd to Batman for the last 25 years.
ReplyDeleteI agree. If Cena turns heel, does he really change? He's already a smirking douche. What he needs is some creative story-lines. People thought that the build-up to Mania with Rock wasn't as strong as it should have been but at least Cena wasn't as insufferable as he is now.
ReplyDeleteThere was that one particular promo he did, I believe the RAW before WM, where he told Rock that even though people boo him, hate him or whatever, he still wins ("I still win") his biggest matches/challenges. That led to his cockiness being his downfall at Mania when he went for his own People's Elbow, which led to the Brock Lesnar feud. All stuff that was tweaking his character and making him a bit more intriguing...but then he went back to the old stale material.
The potential is THERE to do something awesome. Maybe if Cena and Punk square off again, we'll see it.
THIS BUSINESS!!!
ReplyDeletecean jobs to the attitude era... when it should be the other way around.
ReplyDeletehow many make a wishes did hogan do as hollywood?
ReplyDeleteAre you suggesting that WCW shouldn't have turned him heel, so as to not jeopardize how many Make-a-Wish requests he was getting?
ReplyDeleteNo he's asking if Hogan still did make a wishes after turning heel. Because if he was still in demand, it wasn't that big of deal turning Hogan.
ReplyDeleteClose but no cigar. Im asking if his appearances decreased when he went heel.
ReplyDeleteIt doesnt matter if a heel or face does make a wish cuz guess what, the kid is DYING! If I was going thru make a wish, id want Lisa Ann or Ricki White coming to my place a giving me a super BJ.
I'd REALLY like to see Cena job to Ziggler, or Rhodes, or Wade Barrett, or Sheamus. SOMEONE NEW DAMMIT!
ReplyDeleteThat's my post and I wouldn't say it's wasting time if your a fan of WWE and don't normally visit yahoo sports page and maybe find a positive main stream article about the WWE interesting.
ReplyDeleteBut I'll reiterate what some of the other posters said that agreed with me that not only does Cena do a lot of charity work but he is actually the most requested athlete with Make A Wish. Which is huge for the WWE because they don't have the most positive image in the main stream media. And yes I do believe those request go down if Cena is heel. Because as other people said dying kids see him as his character. Which I'm sure it was like back in the Hulkamania days.
And my mention of Hogan didn't really have anything to do with my comment about Cena. I just thought it was funny that Hogan was one of the top wish givers ever even though he's kind of a douche in real life.
I think it was more of a comment about WWE than Hogan. Because it shows how much Vince puts into charity work. Also it was Vince who turned Hogan heel.
The problem with turning Cena heel is that you risk driving away the fans he brings in with no guarantee that people who are currently anti-Cena will pick up the slack. That's what happened when Austin turned heel: a whole subset of fans left and never came back. The problem isn't Cena, it's the WWE's inability to promote anyone who appeals to adult fans.
ReplyDeleteHogan was the #1 star in WWF and WCW from January 1984 until August 1996. If my math is correct, that's slightly over 13.5 years. Even when he was on hiatus, he was still #1. As much as Cena has dominated the scene, he hasn't been #1 anywhere close to 13.5 years. And he's still in his prime, whereas Hogan was already past his prime by 1993. Cena has granted more wishes in his 9-year WWE career than Hogan has done in his 28-year WWE/WCW/TNA career. IMO it's a bigger deal for Cena to turn heel based on that than it was for Hogan.
ReplyDeleteRaw ratings had steadily been going down since around august 2000. Austin's heel turn wasn't the only factor in that decline.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying this to be a jerk but a legit question for context: do you have kids, and if you do about how old are they and who do they cheer for?
ReplyDeleteUh, I think you mean it was Eric Bischoff that turned Hogan heel? Unless you mean the nWo comeback in 2002?
ReplyDeleteI, for one, got what you were saying when it came to Hogan. Lots of interesting points were made in your message.
ReplyDeleteGood call, there. I do think some fans left because they had seen the entire character arc of Steve Austin. Cena's not the problem. The need to place him at the forefront is the problem. The lack of focus on an alternative is the problem.
ReplyDeletetinyurl is your friend
ReplyDeletedidnt he already job to sheamus a few years back already??
ReplyDeleteSorry that was a typo. I meant wasn't Vince.
ReplyDeleteFalling through a table doesn't count as a job.
ReplyDeleteI'm all for Cena's character being freshened up and put in more interesting storylines, but an outright heel turn seems superfluous. So say Cena turns heel in some epic Hogan-joins-the-NWO fashion. Then suddenly you'll have the vocal male fans cheering Cena because he'll make a great heel, while the younger fans may all be heartbroken about their hero going evil. I'm not sure it's a formula for success.
ReplyDeleteWho says the guys are suddenly going to cheer Cena?
ReplyDeleteAlmost everyone at this blog.
ReplyDeleteIt's a post that zandude is bitching about?!
ReplyDeleteNo way!
He's not going to answer you, so I will.
ReplyDeleteNo.
(As though you needed that answer, lol)
Guess what wrestling is? An industry marketed to kids.
ReplyDeleteIt always has been save for about 2.5 years in the very late 90's.
I think it might be time for a bunch of grown adults to finally come to the realization that they're watching a television show marketed to children and it's never going to be "mature" enough for them no matter how much they wish it to be so.
ReplyDeleteIt's a television show about fake fighting for goodness sake.
Except if you give ue a compelling enough heel character, we'll keep booing him. See: Undertaker demanding respect in 2002, Rock in 2003, Foley in 2006, Big Show at least twice a year.
ReplyDeleteCena and Santino are the only thing marketed towards kids. Everything else? Not so much.
ReplyDeleteHuh, I guess that TV rating is just a swerve then. I could swear the entire show was marketed to children by virtue of it being, you know, marketed directly to children.
ReplyDeleteLol. This reads more like "Why won't they let us be part of the show?"
ReplyDeleteI'd guess it's because the show's target is 10 year olds.
Nothing says marketed towards children like starting your main show at 9 PM and ending at 11 PM on a school night!
ReplyDeleteNothing says not understanding marketing like being unable to understand the idea that everything has to start at 6pm on the west coast for ratings purposes.
ReplyDeleteIt's nice the way you, you know, don't actually think anything out.
....says the guy who thinks wrestling has always been marketed towards children. Spoiler alert: Wrestling didn't start in 1985.
ReplyDeletePost 1,000 more times and say LOL in each one.
You are, without a doubt, the worst person I've ever encountered on the internet. Every argument you get into, you immediately call people stupid and accuse them of being brainwashed. You LOL at yourself and NEVER. STOP. RESPONDING. I am convinced those children are not yours, and if they are, I hope their mother pays attention to them, seeing as you've got to focus everything you have on being COOL ON THE INTERNET. A venture you fail miserably at, by the way.
Douche.
Never. Stop. Responding?
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, and you're doing what now?
Wrestling has always been marketed to children, it's true. I Like how you didn't *actually* argue that point, you just said I'm an ass for believing it (and being able to argue it consistently).
I've never called anyone stupid. I don't have to resort to insulting language. I have arguments based on reason.
You have, well, insults against one year old;s because you are SO BRAVE ON THE INTERNET.
Hahaha.
I get paid to sit here and design websites, lol'ing at you is just a side benefit to my career. Thanks for playing and I look forward to MORE RESPONSES.
Oh I get it! You want wrestling to go back to the way it was BEFORE 1985, when it wasn't on national television!
ReplyDeleteWhy sure! Let's put that genie back in the bottle because lord knows no one likes MONEY!
Hahahaha. What a lame argument. "Yeah well, music wasn't always marketed to teens! Remember Mozart!"
Call me more names, I *love* when kids start talking out of school, lol.
I love how you're such a cock guzzling turd that you probably sit there with a smug grin thinking, "HAHA I SHOWED THIS GUY ON THE INTERNET WHAT'S UP!"
ReplyDeleteSo let's clarify your argument: I am wrong and you are right, wrestling HAS always been marketed towards kids. And your proof? That when it wasn't marketed towards kids, it "didn't draw money"(except that, ya know, it did).
So once again, to repeat your argument: Wrestling has ALWAYS been marketed to kids, BECAUSE WHEN IT WASN'T MARKETED TOWARDS KIDS, it didn't make money.
Let's see if you can figure out the problem here.OR, you can just say I'm dumb again, then say SO. BRAVE.BTW, I work on a computer all day too and shocker, I don't post 10,000 times.
MORE RESPONSES! Yay!
ReplyDeleteHey at least this time you figured out how to reply to me.
You thought about me all day didn't you? lol
Youreadeveryword, again.
ReplyDeleteYou don't know much about me, I'm fairly compelled to respond to silly arguments.
ReplyDeleteI really do stop reading when someone resorts to name calling for lack of an argument.
You should try it again, but this time write like a grown adult, not a nine year old.
It's cute that you think you don't argue like a 9 year old. Please, call me stupid more and say I'm brainwashed by ESPN.
ReplyDeleteLOL
ReplyDeleteYup, you've got the high road here, it's true.
Insult any toddlers lately Brave Guy?
Hahahaha.
MORE RESPONSES PLEASE.
Oh please, you're the genius here. It's YOUR responsibility to tell ME why a show aimed at children ends at 11 PM at night on the East coast.
ReplyDeleteI already did but here, we'll do it again, JUST FOR YOU.
ReplyDeleteFamilies aren't home on the west coast until at least 5:30 or so. So, for ratings purposes, nothing starts until 9pm on the east coast.
Like the NBA playoffs.
TA~DA! You just learned something! Congratulations!
Now go back to calling me names, it suits you better.
This does nothing to address the point I made originally. Shockingly, it was a point you responded to with arrogance and suggesting I was an idiot for daring to, gasp, say something that wasn't in complete and total agreement with you.
ReplyDeleteThe point is this, and please, PLEASE give me an answer on this: If this is a TV show aimed at children as you suggest, why does it end at 11 PM on school nights in 5 of the 10 biggest TV markets in the country?
You can't use the "They do it because of the west coast and want the biggest group of people watching at once" argument while AT THE SAME TIME stating that the only market they are aimed at is children. TA-DA, YOU JUST LEARNED SOMETHING.
I already answered this question. The answer is still valid.
ReplyDeleteEvery major live television event does it.
You've been schooled. Congrats.
So, to clarify, your answer to "Why does a show that you claim caters to children end at 11 PM on the East Coast?" is, "EVERY LIVE EVENT DOES IT."
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you patted yourself on the back there, thinking, "HAHA I SHOWED HIM." except it does not further your argument. It just proves that, again, they do not cater to children. If they did, they would not air live, they would tape and air at a time when children in some of the biggest markets in America can watch them before going to bed.
TA-DA, YOU LEARNED SOMETHING.
No, my answer was and still is: So that the network can get the highest possible ratings.
ReplyDeleteYou still haven't argued that point, you're going in a desperate circle.
Just like your awesome argument about "Well it wasn't marketed to kids in the 70's! You know! When they made SIGNIFICANTLY LESS MONEY!"
Good stuff. You should own your own business with that scary business acumen you've got there.
Come on, call me more names. I like that part.
To clarify, no, that wasn't my answer but I'm not surprised you latched on to that hoping it somehow gave you a point to argue.
ReplyDeleteMy answer was in the previous post. You know, the one about *CRAZY ENOUGH* television stations wanting to have the highest possible ratings for a show so they broadcast when the most people are able to watch.
*CRAAAAAZY* lol
And once again, you have changed the argument and acted like you didn't. At this point, I don't even think you're aware you do it.
ReplyDeleteYour comment was that wrestling has ALWAYS been marketed at kids except for a few years in the 90's. That is a foolish comment because in the history of pro wrestling, being a "kids" product is a relatively new thing, starting in the 80's.
Nowhere did I say that wrestling in the 1970's was better or they made more money. Why didn't I say that? Because it does not matter when arguing the point that wrestling has always been marketed towards kids, as you stated. I am sorry you do not understand this.
Had you said "Wrestling makes the most money when aimed towards kids." I couldn't argue much(unless I went the Attitude Era route, but even that was marketed towards teens, still kids). But you didn't say that. You said it has ALWAYS been a kids product.
It clearly hasn't. Rather than admit that you are wrong, you now attack and say, "HAHA YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND BUSINESS!! HAHAHA YOU DON'T GET RATINGS LIKE I DO!!!"
Except that the argument was never about drawing money or ratings. You chose to take it in that direction, then choose to attack me for not replying to your sub-argument.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY YOU ARE RIDICULOUS TO TALK TO, AND I CHOOSE TO INSTEAD INSULT YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN.
"AND I CHOOSE TO INSTEAD INSULT YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN."
ReplyDeleteRight. Because you don't have an argument. I've said that a few times now. Glad to see you're finally seeing the light.