Are The Following 5 Wrestlers Overrated or Underrated, Explain?BQ?

The only "fans" that tend to act that way are the IWC, a group which, for the most part, is extremely narrow-minded and never happy or satisfied with anything Vince McMahon (or the rest of the wrestling world) produces, yet continues to tune in, and complain, regularly. I think that in and of itself is a pretty complex psychology question. There has always been a "Superman" character.

The top champion of the WWE, hero or villain, generally wins more matches than they ever had before winning the title. Even heels who win the belt tend to win more matches. They tend to become better cheaters.

What so many online fans don't seem to get is that if you have a "world champion" who doesn't win much, well, what exactly is he the champion of? People whined endlessly when John Cena, the number one contender for the WWE Championship, defeated The Miz cleanly on RAW. We heard all the tired old complaints about how Cena had "buried" The Miz (that's another term that gets thrown around all the time by online fans, without most of them having any clue what it actually means), and how he's "SuperCena".

Um...people...HE'S THE NUMBER ONE CONTENDER! Think about it this way: For the average fan, if Cena, the top challenger for the top title in the company, goes out on RAW and loses to the third level champion, why would you suddenly want to pay money to see him take on Punk at the PPV? If he can't beat the Intercontinental Champion, then how is he a legitimate threat to the WORLD CHAMPION?

I know that most IWC fans don't think this way. Many like to fancy themselves couch writers of the WWE, but that's why they aren't actual writers. Ordinary fans DO think that way.

Ordinary fans don't think "oh, well, Cena lost but the writers still made him look strong". They just see that Cena lost. For a group that prides themselves on supposedly being "smarter" than the "marks", they actually know stunningly little about what booking really is.

Another part of it is the desperate (and honestly, pathetic) attempt to try and be "cool" by hating on the "popular" wrestlers. Look, everyone knows today that pro wrestling is scripted. That's nothing new.

But there is a portion of the audience, particularly of the online variety, who like wrestling but don't want to see "dumb" by "falling for it", so they come onto sites like this one and talk like they know all the secrets of the business. They want to see smart to...um...other fans, so they refuse to be impressed when the face wrestlers do something cool or impressive, because that might make them "marks". It's really kind of twisted actually.

But here's what they're missing: Vince McMahon doesn't care. He knows that those fans will still tune in anyway. They may hate John Cena when the WWE is marketing him as a hero, but they still watch to boo him.

They may ***** about The Undertaker never losing, but they still buy Wrestlemania to watch him. So really, their complaining amounts to nothing. BQ: And yes, the dream matches thing drives me nuts, but I've taught myself not to care.

I love those matches, so I just enjoy them when they happen. Seeing Cena against The Rock or Brock Lesnar against any number of today's stars is something I've wanted to see for years, and now it's actually happening! I like getting into the show and just being a fan (probably one of the reasons I've spent less time here recently).

That's fun for me; way more fun than being the jaded "internet smark" who complains about everything.

You really can't get much farther than what Clark W just said. Perfect answer.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.