When pro wrestling began to suck...

Don't be puttin' words in my mouth that I didn't say, kid. :|

Now he's talking about your mom.

ooooh snap.

I'm sorry...Galactus push? I gotta be honest, it really just sounds like your hating on wrestlers because they happen to win matches. Sheamus has been given a push yes, and it's been a good one and the guy is putting on good matches. He sells just fine, He sold for Daniel Bryan at Extreme Rules in their really awesome 2/3 falls match, he sold for Jericho, Orton, and..whoever the 4th guy was, I think Daniel Bryan, at Over the Limit, and he damn near lost the title to Del Rio at Money in the Bank.

As for Galactus reference...it doesn't make much sense. Galactus has lost to everybody.

Also, you seem to have the wrong idea of what a Jobber is. Yes, Del Rio, Ziggles and Rhodes have lost to Sheamus, but they are in no way jobbers. Ziggles has "Future World Champion" written all over him, Rhodes just came off of the best IC Title run in years, and yes I'm counting his long run and one month run together, and Del Rio has huge charisma, gets good reactions, has a hilarious announcer, and will always have a place in the upper mid card-main event level.

Just because a wrestler loses a match does not make a jobber out of them. Sheamus also doesn't just plow through these guys, he works a solid match with them, then ends up getting the win afterwords. I don't get it. It's like you don't understand or just hate the idea that a world champion has to WIN matches. Otherwise what's the point? If Sheamus lost to every single person he fought, then he would be a jobber and you would be hating that he was champion...if he would even last long enough to win the belt in the first place.

Your comic references are another story. The two simply cannot be compared.

The Superman-Cena comparison, despite being used by everyone, isn't appropriate. Cena HAS lost matches to "regular mooks" before. Sure he rarely loses clean, but a loss is still a loss. He certainly didn't win against Miz at Mania 27, or against Tensai on Raw, or Johnny Ace at Over the Limit, or Punk last Raw, or Punk at Money in the Bank and Summerslam 2011, or Rock at Mania. Hell, Cena has yet to beat Sheamus yet! Cena may not lose all that often, but he still loses. Superman has lost several times. Hell, he's lost to Batman, a guy Superman could kill in seconds, on several occasions. Cena DOES learn from his matches, he has shown that at several times and in several promos. As for being a constant "goody two shoes" guy, didn't we already establish that Cena is a hypocrite? Would the goody two shoes humiliate Johnny Ace and Cole for fun? Would they steal the win from Punk, contradicting their own message earlier in the show, then still act like they deserved the win they got and reap the reward? Would a goody two shoes do all the post match beatdown crap that he has done to Miz, JBL, and Batista in their I Quit matches? Cena is not an all around "goody good" He's just a hypocritical face that gets away with his crap because he does it to heels. Which is also the only reason Orton is a face as well.

As for your "Sheamus is Galactus" comment....that came utterly out of nowhere and makes no sense. Galactus is one of the biggest jobbers in the marvel universe. He loses to EVERYONE. In fact, Kane would be a far better comparison to use for Galactus, because Kane is also big and scary, Kane also gets the "multi man" treatment, and is treated and talked about as a big threat to "the universe"....Yet he has lost to literally every member of the roster at one point or another and is his mystique is nothing like what it once was. Sheamus takes and sells moves just fine, he doesn't one count anything (NOBODY uses a one count anymore) He has no servants, he can, and has, been beaten up and assaulted by one man before, (Again, Daniel Bryan, Del Rio, Jericho, Orton, Tensai) and most of the time wins by hitting that Brouge Kick of his from out of the blue, which would naturally lead to a win.


And your complaint about Onslaught is just goofy. Onslaught was born of the two most powerful mutants, and two of the most powerful characters in all of Marvel. The ENTIRE POINT of Onslaught was to be stupidly overpowered to force a massive team up. It was Marvels version of a "Crisis Event". Plus Onslaught has had what? three overall appearances/story arks? I mean, Undertaker only shows up once a year now, does a bunch of awesome shit that is overpowered, then leaves for a year, and nobody complains about that.

Far as I can tell, you either hate Sheamus/Cena, or you hate big guys instead of smaller ones, or you hate wrestlers that win alot, or you just are looking for stuff to complain about. And comparing wrestlers to Comic characters does not work in any real way.

[quote="Bluemouse":2fn6e277]I think what Alex is getting at is that it's apparent that you don't know much about comics.