**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He's a pretty clear 4th in terms of WWE history behind Hogan, Austin, and Bruno, that's the argument. You could argue his longevity against Austin's, but Stone Cold's peak is higher. Hogan stacks up better in terms of longevity, although Cena does beat him, but, again, Hogan's peak is much higher. Bruno has both longevity and peak against Cena.
Cena's main argument is his longevity and availability, but I don't think he ever reached the same highs as the three mentioned. He comfortably clears everyone else, though who had similar runs (Backlund, Bret, HBK). Roman might have an argument, his run led to this current boom, but we'll see how that goes and you could argue how much is attributable to Roman, I'd still have Cena over him.
I'd have Cena above him because his run on top was like five times longer and Rock was overshadowed by Austin, but I can see the argument for having Rock above Cena.
The fact that wrestling lost millions of viewers with him at the helm? Not saying he is at fault for the Super Cena bullshit, but you can't deny that turned a lot of people off from the product.
Not even close? Friend, the wrestlers who did it better than him can be counted on one hand. Even then, he got it done in the ring on more than one occasion
Pro wrestling isn’t all about the technical/ring work. It’s a complete package type of job, cena is S Tier based on that
It's literally the point. The skill in wrestling is getting me to want to see you do a choreographed dance. It's not whose the fastest, jumps the highest, had the best suplex.
It depends on what question you’re asking and how it’s viewed. In acting, being the biggest box office draw doesn’t necessarily mean you’re the best actor, and when discussing it people see that as two different things. I’ve never heard anyone say “X is the best actor in the world because their movies make the most money”, that’s not how acting ability is judged.
If you’re asking who is the biggest draw, that’s one question. If you’re asking who the best wrestler is, that’s a different question and is going to be dependent on the person answering.
Sure in acting, people say that. But that only matters in the current discussion. Any discussion of the past inevitable focuses on actors linked to movies with commercial success.
That’s really not the case at all. Obviously there’s less discussion as time goes on regarding that since there isn’t a big vote and ceremony to honor the best of the year, but people absolutely do not, after the fact, stop talking about people who won best actor for their acting ability, and people do not start equating acting ability with box office draw after the fact either.
In terms of MOVIES what people are more likely to discuss is big draw movies, absolutely, in the same way people would be more likely to talk about a Wrestlemania than about a Backlash, even if Backlash was a better subjective PPV. But I absolutely see discussions of past best actor/actress winners (which again is tied to acting performance, not box office draw), and people will talk about amazing performances in movies that didn’t “draw” all the time. People will also talk about box office draws and big stars, absolutely, but most people don’t automatically say “the best actor of the 80s is X because they had the biggest box office”.
I’m not saying being a draw is meaningless (it isn’t) or doesn’t equate to a good wrestler (it can), nor would I ever say being a draw isn’t important to being a wrestler (it definitely is). What I’m saying is it isn’t automatic that people’s views of “great wrestler” should begin and end with “draw”, which is what multiple people in this thread are claiming. That’s not the case in most forms of entertainment, not in sports, or movies, or whatever else. Drawing money is very important for all of these things, but that’s viewed as a different skill than being great at your chosen form of entertainment. Often there’s a ton of crossover, but not always.
It’s subjective as best wrestler would be. Cases can be made for plenty of people, particularly if you’re only including movies from the 80s (De Niro isnt a bad pick with Raging Bull sneaking in for example, but some of his other greatest movie performances were in the 70s and 90s so miss this). But i probably wouldn’t say “the kid from ET” (highest grossing film). Harrison Ford appears to be the top grossing star; he’s certainly a well loved actor and people talk about him as a big time star, but people don’t necessary talk about Harrison Ford as the greatest actor of the 80s. Because people see best actor as performance. They might say someone is the greatest movie star of the 80s, but that’s a different debate.
I misread what you said.
But reading the comment you replied to again I still disagree.
Cena is a top 5 draw (maybe), the spectacle, the character... Not the wrestling because if it was measured by who is the best wrestler then Cena doesn't even enter the conversation.
The movie industry has a very famous ceremony every year where they decide who was the best actor via their opinions. Nobody hands the best actor award automatically to “who was the biggest box office draw this year”.
But it takes skills to be a draw in itself too, if we specifically takes only in-ring technicality Tanahashi was not even close to being the best wrestler in the main event scene, but it was his ability to connect with the audience like no other along with being a great storyteller was what skyrocketed him and basically opened New Japan to the new golden era
Agree. A huge draw and one of the most successful to ever do it. A fairly good actual wrestler but not even in the top couple of hundred in terms of actual ability.
\*in your opinion
So many things are outside of a wrestler's control when it comes to exposure and booking decisions. John has talked before about how [he was about to be fired, but Stephanie heard him rapping backstage and saved him after hearing the rap and helped make it his character. ](https://www.sportskeeda.com/wwe/who-prevented-john-cena-fired-wwe-know-unbelievable-story#:~:text=%E2%80%9CI%20was%20on,T%20FirstSportz)
So think about how if Stephanie never heard John rapping, he would have been fired, and would be nowhere close to these conversations, even though most of the stuff was out of his control.
Sure, John did do really good and become a star, but think of all of the other people that could have been a star as well if they were pushed to the top for a sustained amount of time.
Not trying to make it sound like I'm hating on John, but becoming a top star really relies on the people in the back giving you an opportunity, so it's hard to gauge someone's "skill" based on something that comes down to that.
Also WWE strapped the rocket on John when the biggest competition was TNA, a lack of internet pretty much meant WWE was the only big game. It's a factor, would Cena even be a big draw if there was another viable promotion to counter WWE?
It's hard to say. Retroactively looking back now, the answer *seems* like an obvious "yes" since he's such a star now, but I believe it's impossible to say either way.
> it's impossible to say either way.
Yep, all we can really say is that when Austin and Rock stopped being full time in 2002, ratings, attendance and PPV buys took a sharp nosedive (Lesnar first push was terrible drawing wise but Lesnar being a massive MMA draw and then drawing when he came back to WWE mostly due to his MMA legitmacy, resulted in revisionist histroy that he was always money) However Cena (and Batista as well to a lesser extent) STOPPED the bleeding. WWE in 2005 is when the company stablised. Rating were still down but ticket sales and PPVs were up. Whenever Cena was around busy was good and there was noticeable dips whenever Cena was not in the spotlight or if he was injured.
This is why McDonalds has the tastiest food and Wal Mart sells the best quality products, right? If all that matters for quality is how many people consume it, after all.
This is such a stupid argument. Wrestlers are entertainers not fast food companies or big box companies or companies of any kind. Their job is to entertain. So yes, the skill that is most important for a wrestler is their ability to entertain or to make people want to watch them perform.
So the best actors are the ones who star in the movies that make the most money. Which makes Stan Lee the best actor in the world for being in movies that have made $30b total.
The skill of wal mart is selling goods and McDonald's selling burgers. Transformers 3 sold many times more tickets than The Thing, if that metaphor helps you by sticking to entertainment.
I'm just saying that appealing to the lowest common denominator, in all mediums, will appeal to the widest audience, and that being inoffensive and digestible is infinitely more marketable than being great.
I love John Cena, but if selling more albums than anyone else this year makes Drake the most talented musician alive, I'll have to politely disagree.
Yeah and being a good in ring wrestler is tied to that, if Cena doesn't grow past the wrestler he was post 2013 his legacy would be so much different imo.
Sure, I don't see many arguments against it.
People say that business went down under Cena, which in a way is true, but it is also true that unlike Rock and Austin, he remained around long enough to be during the cyclical downturn wrestling always has.
Rock and Austin left before that happened but if they had been around(as like active, full time wrestlers) during the RA era, it would have happened to them too
> People say that business went down under Cena, which in a way is true
It isn't really true. For some reason people seem to imagine that WWE's history went "Attitude Era > John Cena" and miss out that there was this 2002-05 period in between where Triple H was the centrepiece of the promotion where the real big decline happened. 2006-07 when Cena was the top guy actually had a significant upswing, especially when you look at ticket sales (which imo is the most reliable factor). There was another decline in 2008-09, but I think wrestling fans weirdly jump to the conclusion that Cena or indeed anything that happened on WWE's shows was the main cause of that, when the obvious explanation is there was a major recession. Not to mention the whole Benoit incident.
>Wrestling from the time Cena left was much less popular as when he came in.
this is an unusual argument, because when a lot of the guys you put above like Hogan,Flair and Andre left the business, it was less popular than when they came in (and honestly, i just dont know enough about Bruno to comment)
Maybe I'm young (and biased because I grew up when Cena came into the biz) but I feel like he's above all of those following names. I agree on the four above him.
I don't think he can be put above Andre or Dusty, tbh. I can see arguments for the rest of the Americans. Inoki, Baba, and El Santo also go above him if we're talking internationally.
This right here is the answer. 50 years covers almost the entire history of wrestling. It's not a shameful thing to not be top 5 since 1974. I'm not even sure Rock or Austin belong above Andre, Bruno, Dusty or Inoki. and El Santo 100% makes the list.
understood and acknowledged. By no means did I take umbrage with your post, you nailed how difficult it would be to anoint someone as top 5 from 1974-present.
In the last 50 years? Unfortunately not. We have had Rock, Austin, Bret, Stone Cold, Shawn Michaels, Hogan, Bruno, Andre and Undertaker to say the least. 50 years is a long time… maybe in the last 20 years
No. You're going back to 1974, and wrestling was way more popular in the 70s and 80s than it was in the subsequent decades.
Top 5 most important/valuable to the WWWF/WWF/WWE in the last 50 years? That's possible if you were going to say Sammartino, Hogan, Austin, Rock and Cena. But you'd have to exclude Andre the Giant who was one of the biggest pure draws in wrestling history.
I think Cena already outdid the Rock tbh. Staying power, ring wise, maybe not mic skills but everything else, definitely.
He is arguably in the top 5 no doubt.
The Rock do try his best to reverse it in 2024 tho. Cena and Rock could both be active in 2025 (Cena's last run and Rock's bloodline business) interesting to see how their legacy will be underlined.
Staying power perhaps , but I would argue that Rock has him beat there too by virtue of the fact he’s proven time again that he can reinvent himself and still be over. Cena had longevity but he was so stale at some points and never changed his presentation. I think Rock was better than him in ring too, more athletic, better move set, better seller. I have no doubts that Rock would have excelled in Cena’s position, but I’m not sure I can confidently say the same in reverse.
I don't want to get to get to controversial lol, but I reckon I apreaciate that cena learned to cut better promos without the need to be edgy or have juvenile humor.
That being said the highs of Rock's most memorable promos are something else
I think Rock is more charismatic overall, counting body language and facial expressions, but Cena cuts better promos. Rock tends to be too cute even when he's being serious, while Cena can cut the bullshit and be serious.
In terms of drawing power it's honestly such a different ball game post Hogan because drawing power before Hulkamania was purely based on the gate. Hogan added National TV Deals, Toys, Cartoons, etc. So we're in whole different argument at that point. So that's the question I guess if you're talking everything given the fact he's a movie star now yeah hes probably in the top 5 but if you're based on putting butts in seats in an arena. He's probably top 25 and I'm not even confident saying that because guys in the 70s and 80s worked a lot harder for that
* Hulk Hogan
* Steve Austin
* Shawn Michaels
* The Rock
* The Undertaker
Who you taking out? You also have to account for someone like Roman Reigns who probably for me is ahead as well. Randy Orton, Ric Flair, Bret Hart, Macho Man, Andre the Giant, etc.
I am going to say no. Top 10 probably? Top 5? Nah.
I'd have him above the last three. HBK was not a huge money draw, even if I think he was better in-ring than Cena. I can see the argument for Rock and Taker, but Rock's run is actually pretty short and overshadowed by Austin, and Taker was never 'the guy' in the same way Cena was.
Over the last 50, WWE alone, I'd say Bruno is over Cena and I'd listen to arguments for Andre.
50 years??? In terms of quality or making money or both????
I think Cena didn’t become a mainstream guy until he became a part-timer. Casuals knew him, but he wasn’t a big deal to them
No.
Cena's a top tier talent, and became a good wrestler, but he's not as good as Sting, and Sting isn't a top 5 in last 50 years.
In terms of Drawing- Rock, Hogan, Austin, Flair, El Santo, Crush Gals, Baba, Inoki. Bruno, Roman.
Bret Hart belongs on that list. He was crazy over in international markets, including India which happens to be the highest populated country on earth.
Amount of people doesn't equal drawing power, IF that's was true then CMLL actually outdraws WWE based on attendance most weeks. Economic conditions for a country has to be taken in account and WWE makes more money than CMLL because Americans are more rich.
Pro Wrestling is HUGE in India but WWE doesn't make a lot of money in India whenever they tour there, because the majority of the population is poor and can't afford tickets. The 2017 Jinder tour was a complete flop due to this (and other reasons like how a Indian heel who was born in Canada is not going to be cool with Indians).
So you can't really bring up India as a massive place to draw when WWE goes over there they don't draw large crowds. WWE does better in Australia for example.
Ha! Knew this shit was coming. Because Dave Meltzer said this a whole rain of "Meltzer is racist" came down on him BUT I am Indian and I am pretty sure you are NOT because if you were you would know what I said rings true, WWE does NOT come over here and when they do it doesn't really reflect how big and popular they are over here because people just don't attend. But sure try to score some "ha gotta" SJW points.
Genichiro Tenryu, Terry Funk, Bret Hart, Negro Casas, Atlantis, Stan Hansen, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Mick Foley, Tatsumi Fujinami, Jumbo Tsuruta, El Satanico, Bryan Danielson, Rey Mysterio
Probably not
People in the last few years gave rose colored glasses for Cena’s run on top. He was defiantly a draw during his time, and probably helped keep WWE afloat during its worst era of general popularity.
But he wasn’t selling out shows as a top guy. Arenas had to black out levels of seats cause it wasn’t sell out after sell out with Cena as you top guy. Plus the willingness to not trust anyone but Cena lead to the termination of any true budding number 2 in the company.
Cena in the ring was as good as Austin or hogan during their peaks, so it’s pretty much a draw there .
Cody is a bigger babyface draw than Cena probably if we are being honest. He has a long way to go to touch his merch sales in total, but in every other way he’s been a bigger babyface than Cena in his short time on top.
Austin is an overall better wrestler than both of them in their peaks, but Attitude era Austin is a man with a bad neck and borderline working knees who adapted to being a brawler, who can use his charisma and popularity to push a match to the next level than actually giving day in/day out great matches.
Which isn’t a bad thing, Hogan was the same which helps keep you at the top when you work a move set that keeps you healthy during your run.
I think Cena during his main event/top guy run prob has better overall matches between the ropes than either one. But Austin and Hogans bigger matches prob more memorable.
the sad thing is long before us open challenge and going into part-time more, people always forget cena was always good in ring even with his limited moveset by putting unforgettable matches with edge, orton, rvd, jbl, angle, hbk, hhh, rock, punk, lesnar, umaga and even khali not to mention he always amazing on promos. he is everything that you wanted to be top guy and face of the company due to his hard work and charisma. cena earned respect from people especially those who hated him back between 2015 and 2018 like he should during his run as top guy and that made them realize that vince held him back with his outdated 80’s booking style because he was still stuck in the past. cena gave it all to us in order to entertain us every night with this crappy booking and his limited moveset because of his dedication for the business. looking back, cena was the unfortunate victim of everything IWC hated that represented wwe during pg era creatively, booking wise and roster wise because guys like edge, hbk, batista retired and left while others like hhh, taker went part-time mode. cena was put in weird situations and storylines with wrong opponents with lack of chemistry like miz, r-truth, del rio and ryback not to mention guys like established star like orton and big show who lost their appeal during pg era. and cena managed to make it work and understood the art of performing in ring as white meat top babyface despite crappy booking that vince gave to him and people booed and hated him. i respect him for that. people forget that wwe was receiving PR and mainstream backlash for the benoit incident and cena managed to get wwe out of the turmoil that the company had to deal at the time and he was the right guy to carry the company through grim times especially during creatively ill fated pg era. if wasn’t for cena being the guy, wwe would be in big trouble and out of business especially during the benoit incident. i think the hardcore fans who blindly hated cena during his pg supercena era where the same ones who loved him during his word life/thug cena era all the way to the top whose were also attitude era fans.
the reason that cena had a better time at the top despite his crappy booking because of his unmatched work ethic, his longevity due to his safe moveset which prevented him from getting injured, his connection with the crowd especially those who booed him and his hard work. the fact the cena was able to stay at the top for a decade was insane. that showed it was a true testament to his talents and skills as in-ring perfomer especially during pg era and his supercena run and he managed to made it work
i tell you what and what happened with the product at the time showed that whether smarks wanna admit or not, from the moment that cena went to part-time mode, the product at the time until summer 2022 especially in 2018 and 2019 wasn’t the same and was lacking of star power because love him or hate him, cena brought all the greatness, passion and intensity for the product and the fans even those who hated him while he was full time. the moment cena gonna retires, IWC gonna regret big time for not recognizing his greatness until he went part-time because they had no idea how bad the product at the time gonna be when cena went away especially with babyface roman and lesnar as top guys at the expense of the audience. cena is the last legit megastar that wwe ever had.
No. I don't even consider him even top 20. I did a recent rewatch of his career and segments to reevaluate him. He was my favorite wrestler from 2004 to 2006. I used to defend him against the growing hate in the IWC. But by road to WrestleMania 22, I got sick of him and disliked him since then.
Upon reevaluating him, in the ring, he was mediocre to average. He's had great matches with some of the best wrestlers of his generation though. But on the average show, he wasn't so great. His selling sucked and it's been my belief that it's part of the reason he got turned on by a portion of the crowd. Lots of his moves don't look great. He gave a great effort in big matches so it's not like he was lazy. I'm not as high on his matches vs Khali, Orton (2007 SummerSlam) and Umaga that his strongest proponents online used to point to as evidence of him being great.
As a talker, he was entertaining until he lost his rapper personality. Then he had the most painful promos, saying the corniest stuff and coming off so hokey. He doesn't book himself but he definitely had the power to reject this crap. Watch an early 2005 promo of Cena vs. a 2012 era. Night and day. The company needed him to be less edgy as they headed into the PG era but it didn't need to be that bad.
From a crowd reaction standpoint, he got the crowd to care about him a lot. He was very over. However I can't highly rate a Babyface who got regularly booked like he did. He was a stagnant character. I don't know how much he controlled this, but as a person watching the program, it got dull. I felt we missed out on some great run like Hollywood Rock or NWO. The Cenation leader was honestly one of the most insufferable main event Babyface gimmicks as it was happening. Rewatching it, didn't help.
I feel he's a 7.5/10. Great company man who did what he was told to a fault.
Big Show said that he felt most secure when Cena lifted him out of anyone, his functional strength is insane.
Wrestling skill is mid, look is great for a wrestler, he sells it on the mic, and has a ton of charisma with crowds.
With that being said, top 5 best wrestlers in the past 50 years is a tall order.
Personally even though I like Cena and he broke into Hollywood successfully, i say no.
depends on ur definition of wrestler, drawing power - yes, impact - yes, in-ring ability - okay, charisma - yes, making himself and the company money - fuck yes
**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In terms of draw? One could argue for and against. In terms of skill? Not even close.
In the charisma and promo ability he is maybe second to no one. His wrestling was solid enough to have matches against any talent.
Depending who you ask, drawing power is literally the only “skill” in wrestling
What’s the argument against him in terms of draw? I’ll listen to the technical wrestling argument but draw?
He's a pretty clear 4th in terms of WWE history behind Hogan, Austin, and Bruno, that's the argument. You could argue his longevity against Austin's, but Stone Cold's peak is higher. Hogan stacks up better in terms of longevity, although Cena does beat him, but, again, Hogan's peak is much higher. Bruno has both longevity and peak against Cena. Cena's main argument is his longevity and availability, but I don't think he ever reached the same highs as the three mentioned. He comfortably clears everyone else, though who had similar runs (Backlund, Bret, HBK). Roman might have an argument, his run led to this current boom, but we'll see how that goes and you could argue how much is attributable to Roman, I'd still have Cena over him.
Meltzer mentioned Rock was a bigger draw during his time as the top guy compared to Cena.
I'd have Cena above him because his run on top was like five times longer and Rock was overshadowed by Austin, but I can see the argument for having Rock above Cena.
The rock’s time as *The* guy was incredibly short, there is no chance he outdrew cena
The fact that wrestling lost millions of viewers with him at the helm? Not saying he is at fault for the Super Cena bullshit, but you can't deny that turned a lot of people off from the product.
Was pushed for too long, had crappy gimmicks. Not saying I think that, just it *could* and has been argued.
Gimmick being crappy or not is irrelevant to whether he was a draw or not :
Not even close? Friend, the wrestlers who did it better than him can be counted on one hand. Even then, he got it done in the ring on more than one occasion Pro wrestling isn’t all about the technical/ring work. It’s a complete package type of job, cena is S Tier based on that
Hence I mentioned two different aspects and didn't give an overall verdict.....
You said not even close on skill lol cena was never will ospreay but ospreay would prob kill to Leave behind a resume of moments like cena has
Lol the skill in wrestling is in the draw.
This is definitely just an opinion, but it seems to be the opinion shared by most people in the business
That's asinine.
It's literally the point. The skill in wrestling is getting me to want to see you do a choreographed dance. It's not whose the fastest, jumps the highest, had the best suplex.
It depends on what question you’re asking and how it’s viewed. In acting, being the biggest box office draw doesn’t necessarily mean you’re the best actor, and when discussing it people see that as two different things. I’ve never heard anyone say “X is the best actor in the world because their movies make the most money”, that’s not how acting ability is judged. If you’re asking who is the biggest draw, that’s one question. If you’re asking who the best wrestler is, that’s a different question and is going to be dependent on the person answering.
Sure in acting, people say that. But that only matters in the current discussion. Any discussion of the past inevitable focuses on actors linked to movies with commercial success.
That’s really not the case at all. Obviously there’s less discussion as time goes on regarding that since there isn’t a big vote and ceremony to honor the best of the year, but people absolutely do not, after the fact, stop talking about people who won best actor for their acting ability, and people do not start equating acting ability with box office draw after the fact either. In terms of MOVIES what people are more likely to discuss is big draw movies, absolutely, in the same way people would be more likely to talk about a Wrestlemania than about a Backlash, even if Backlash was a better subjective PPV. But I absolutely see discussions of past best actor/actress winners (which again is tied to acting performance, not box office draw), and people will talk about amazing performances in movies that didn’t “draw” all the time. People will also talk about box office draws and big stars, absolutely, but most people don’t automatically say “the best actor of the 80s is X because they had the biggest box office”. I’m not saying being a draw is meaningless (it isn’t) or doesn’t equate to a good wrestler (it can), nor would I ever say being a draw isn’t important to being a wrestler (it definitely is). What I’m saying is it isn’t automatic that people’s views of “great wrestler” should begin and end with “draw”, which is what multiple people in this thread are claiming. That’s not the case in most forms of entertainment, not in sports, or movies, or whatever else. Drawing money is very important for all of these things, but that’s viewed as a different skill than being great at your chosen form of entertainment. Often there’s a ton of crossover, but not always.
Whose the best actor of the 80s?
It’s subjective as best wrestler would be. Cases can be made for plenty of people, particularly if you’re only including movies from the 80s (De Niro isnt a bad pick with Raging Bull sneaking in for example, but some of his other greatest movie performances were in the 70s and 90s so miss this). But i probably wouldn’t say “the kid from ET” (highest grossing film). Harrison Ford appears to be the top grossing star; he’s certainly a well loved actor and people talk about him as a big time star, but people don’t necessary talk about Harrison Ford as the greatest actor of the 80s. Because people see best actor as performance. They might say someone is the greatest movie star of the 80s, but that’s a different debate.
I misread what you said. But reading the comment you replied to again I still disagree. Cena is a top 5 draw (maybe), the spectacle, the character... Not the wrestling because if it was measured by who is the best wrestler then Cena doesn't even enter the conversation.
[удалено]
The movie industry has a very famous ceremony every year where they decide who was the best actor via their opinions. Nobody hands the best actor award automatically to “who was the biggest box office draw this year”.
I take it back. THAT was asinine,
But it takes skills to be a draw in itself too, if we specifically takes only in-ring technicality Tanahashi was not even close to being the best wrestler in the main event scene, but it was his ability to connect with the audience like no other along with being a great storyteller was what skyrocketed him and basically opened New Japan to the new golden era
Agree. A huge draw and one of the most successful to ever do it. A fairly good actual wrestler but not even in the top couple of hundred in terms of actual ability.
In professional wrestling, the only skill that matters is the ability to make fans want to watch you perform
\*in your opinion So many things are outside of a wrestler's control when it comes to exposure and booking decisions. John has talked before about how [he was about to be fired, but Stephanie heard him rapping backstage and saved him after hearing the rap and helped make it his character. ](https://www.sportskeeda.com/wwe/who-prevented-john-cena-fired-wwe-know-unbelievable-story#:~:text=%E2%80%9CI%20was%20on,T%20FirstSportz) So think about how if Stephanie never heard John rapping, he would have been fired, and would be nowhere close to these conversations, even though most of the stuff was out of his control. Sure, John did do really good and become a star, but think of all of the other people that could have been a star as well if they were pushed to the top for a sustained amount of time. Not trying to make it sound like I'm hating on John, but becoming a top star really relies on the people in the back giving you an opportunity, so it's hard to gauge someone's "skill" based on something that comes down to that.
Also WWE strapped the rocket on John when the biggest competition was TNA, a lack of internet pretty much meant WWE was the only big game. It's a factor, would Cena even be a big draw if there was another viable promotion to counter WWE?
It's hard to say. Retroactively looking back now, the answer *seems* like an obvious "yes" since he's such a star now, but I believe it's impossible to say either way.
> it's impossible to say either way. Yep, all we can really say is that when Austin and Rock stopped being full time in 2002, ratings, attendance and PPV buys took a sharp nosedive (Lesnar first push was terrible drawing wise but Lesnar being a massive MMA draw and then drawing when he came back to WWE mostly due to his MMA legitmacy, resulted in revisionist histroy that he was always money) However Cena (and Batista as well to a lesser extent) STOPPED the bleeding. WWE in 2005 is when the company stablised. Rating were still down but ticket sales and PPVs were up. Whenever Cena was around busy was good and there was noticeable dips whenever Cena was not in the spotlight or if he was injured.
This is why McDonalds has the tastiest food and Wal Mart sells the best quality products, right? If all that matters for quality is how many people consume it, after all.
This is such a stupid argument. Wrestlers are entertainers not fast food companies or big box companies or companies of any kind. Their job is to entertain. So yes, the skill that is most important for a wrestler is their ability to entertain or to make people want to watch them perform.
So the best actors are the ones who star in the movies that make the most money. Which makes Stan Lee the best actor in the world for being in movies that have made $30b total.
How many movies did Stan Lee star in?
50 cameos apparently
The skill of wal mart is selling goods and McDonald's selling burgers. Transformers 3 sold many times more tickets than The Thing, if that metaphor helps you by sticking to entertainment. I'm just saying that appealing to the lowest common denominator, in all mediums, will appeal to the widest audience, and that being inoffensive and digestible is infinitely more marketable than being great. I love John Cena, but if selling more albums than anyone else this year makes Drake the most talented musician alive, I'll have to politely disagree.
Cena had everyone in the audience over 16 booing him for most of his run. So.. kids decide who the best is?
this is obviously not true
Well if you're going to revise history it isn't.
I don't know what to tell you, everyone in the audience above 16 was not booing him for most of his run, it is just not true, it is what is it
Yeah and being a good in ring wrestler is tied to that, if Cena doesn't grow past the wrestler he was post 2013 his legacy would be so much different imo.
What about those that never got to a larger platform you wouldn’t be able to gauge that for them
You have to judge it in terms of a wrestler who effortlessly gives you both, so Cena is without a doubt there.
Sure, I don't see many arguments against it. People say that business went down under Cena, which in a way is true, but it is also true that unlike Rock and Austin, he remained around long enough to be during the cyclical downturn wrestling always has. Rock and Austin left before that happened but if they had been around(as like active, full time wrestlers) during the RA era, it would have happened to them too
> People say that business went down under Cena, which in a way is true It isn't really true. For some reason people seem to imagine that WWE's history went "Attitude Era > John Cena" and miss out that there was this 2002-05 period in between where Triple H was the centrepiece of the promotion where the real big decline happened. 2006-07 when Cena was the top guy actually had a significant upswing, especially when you look at ticket sales (which imo is the most reliable factor). There was another decline in 2008-09, but I think wrestling fans weirdly jump to the conclusion that Cena or indeed anything that happened on WWE's shows was the main cause of that, when the obvious explanation is there was a major recession. Not to mention the whole Benoit incident.
Yeah people act like the Cena at the top period started in 02
Without Cena it would probably have been much worse.
[удалено]
>Wrestling from the time Cena left was much less popular as when he came in. this is an unusual argument, because when a lot of the guys you put above like Hogan,Flair and Andre left the business, it was less popular than when they came in (and honestly, i just dont know enough about Bruno to comment)
Easy. Yes. He led an entire generation.
[удалено]
Maybe I'm young (and biased because I grew up when Cena came into the biz) but I feel like he's above all of those following names. I agree on the four above him.
I don't think he can be put above Andre or Dusty, tbh. I can see arguments for the rest of the Americans. Inoki, Baba, and El Santo also go above him if we're talking internationally.
This right here is the answer. 50 years covers almost the entire history of wrestling. It's not a shameful thing to not be top 5 since 1974. I'm not even sure Rock or Austin belong above Andre, Bruno, Dusty or Inoki. and El Santo 100% makes the list.
[удалено]
understood and acknowledged. By no means did I take umbrage with your post, you nailed how difficult it would be to anoint someone as top 5 from 1974-present.
In the last 50 years? Unfortunately not. We have had Rock, Austin, Bret, Stone Cold, Shawn Michaels, Hogan, Bruno, Andre and Undertaker to say the least. 50 years is a long time… maybe in the last 20 years
No. You're going back to 1974, and wrestling was way more popular in the 70s and 80s than it was in the subsequent decades. Top 5 most important/valuable to the WWWF/WWF/WWE in the last 50 years? That's possible if you were going to say Sammartino, Hogan, Austin, Rock and Cena. But you'd have to exclude Andre the Giant who was one of the biggest pure draws in wrestling history.
I think Cena already outdid the Rock tbh. Staying power, ring wise, maybe not mic skills but everything else, definitely. He is arguably in the top 5 no doubt.
The Rock do try his best to reverse it in 2024 tho. Cena and Rock could both be active in 2025 (Cena's last run and Rock's bloodline business) interesting to see how their legacy will be underlined.
Staying power perhaps , but I would argue that Rock has him beat there too by virtue of the fact he’s proven time again that he can reinvent himself and still be over. Cena had longevity but he was so stale at some points and never changed his presentation. I think Rock was better than him in ring too, more athletic, better move set, better seller. I have no doubts that Rock would have excelled in Cena’s position, but I’m not sure I can confidently say the same in reverse.
Mic skills cena beats rock I’m afraid
I don't want to get to get to controversial lol, but I reckon I apreaciate that cena learned to cut better promos without the need to be edgy or have juvenile humor. That being said the highs of Rock's most memorable promos are something else
I think Rock is more charismatic overall, counting body language and facial expressions, but Cena cuts better promos. Rock tends to be too cute even when he's being serious, while Cena can cut the bullshit and be serious.
In terms of drawing power it's honestly such a different ball game post Hogan because drawing power before Hulkamania was purely based on the gate. Hogan added National TV Deals, Toys, Cartoons, etc. So we're in whole different argument at that point. So that's the question I guess if you're talking everything given the fact he's a movie star now yeah hes probably in the top 5 but if you're based on putting butts in seats in an arena. He's probably top 25 and I'm not even confident saying that because guys in the 70s and 80s worked a lot harder for that
* Hulk Hogan * Steve Austin * Shawn Michaels * The Rock * The Undertaker Who you taking out? You also have to account for someone like Roman Reigns who probably for me is ahead as well. Randy Orton, Ric Flair, Bret Hart, Macho Man, Andre the Giant, etc. I am going to say no. Top 10 probably? Top 5? Nah.
I'd have him above the last three. HBK was not a huge money draw, even if I think he was better in-ring than Cena. I can see the argument for Rock and Taker, but Rock's run is actually pretty short and overshadowed by Austin, and Taker was never 'the guy' in the same way Cena was. Over the last 50, WWE alone, I'd say Bruno is over Cena and I'd listen to arguments for Andre.
I’m gonna say yes but I was also 8 when I was watching Cena so I imagine that’s a factor 💀
50 years??? In terms of quality or making money or both???? I think Cena didn’t become a mainstream guy until he became a part-timer. Casuals knew him, but he wasn’t a big deal to them
Not in any way. I have to imagine anyone arguing otherwise was a kid during Cena's run on top and is blinded by nostalgia.
... in just America or what?
50? Maybe not. Certainly in the last 25 or so
No. Cena's a top tier talent, and became a good wrestler, but he's not as good as Sting, and Sting isn't a top 5 in last 50 years. In terms of Drawing- Rock, Hogan, Austin, Flair, El Santo, Crush Gals, Baba, Inoki. Bruno, Roman.
Bret Hart belongs on that list. He was crazy over in international markets, including India which happens to be the highest populated country on earth.
Amount of people doesn't equal drawing power, IF that's was true then CMLL actually outdraws WWE based on attendance most weeks. Economic conditions for a country has to be taken in account and WWE makes more money than CMLL because Americans are more rich. Pro Wrestling is HUGE in India but WWE doesn't make a lot of money in India whenever they tour there, because the majority of the population is poor and can't afford tickets. The 2017 Jinder tour was a complete flop due to this (and other reasons like how a Indian heel who was born in Canada is not going to be cool with Indians). So you can't really bring up India as a massive place to draw when WWE goes over there they don't draw large crowds. WWE does better in Australia for example.
So India don’t count Dave?
Ha! Knew this shit was coming. Because Dave Meltzer said this a whole rain of "Meltzer is racist" came down on him BUT I am Indian and I am pretty sure you are NOT because if you were you would know what I said rings true, WWE does NOT come over here and when they do it doesn't really reflect how big and popular they are over here because people just don't attend. But sure try to score some "ha gotta" SJW points.
You alright David?
Nah, thanks for your concern tho.
[удалено]
They did tour India in 96 when Bret was there, and there’s actual footage. [Report.](https://youtu.be/pyCnq436gvY?si=v630IjuQskUOvW3_)
You do realize that they did. Right?
Cena is on mount rushmore
Genichiro Tenryu, Terry Funk, Bret Hart, Negro Casas, Atlantis, Stan Hansen, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Mick Foley, Tatsumi Fujinami, Jumbo Tsuruta, El Satanico, Bryan Danielson, Rey Mysterio Probably not
People in the last few years gave rose colored glasses for Cena’s run on top. He was defiantly a draw during his time, and probably helped keep WWE afloat during its worst era of general popularity. But he wasn’t selling out shows as a top guy. Arenas had to black out levels of seats cause it wasn’t sell out after sell out with Cena as you top guy. Plus the willingness to not trust anyone but Cena lead to the termination of any true budding number 2 in the company. Cena in the ring was as good as Austin or hogan during their peaks, so it’s pretty much a draw there . Cody is a bigger babyface draw than Cena probably if we are being honest. He has a long way to go to touch his merch sales in total, but in every other way he’s been a bigger babyface than Cena in his short time on top.
[удалено]
Austin is an overall better wrestler than both of them in their peaks, but Attitude era Austin is a man with a bad neck and borderline working knees who adapted to being a brawler, who can use his charisma and popularity to push a match to the next level than actually giving day in/day out great matches. Which isn’t a bad thing, Hogan was the same which helps keep you at the top when you work a move set that keeps you healthy during your run. I think Cena during his main event/top guy run prob has better overall matches between the ropes than either one. But Austin and Hogans bigger matches prob more memorable.
Wtf. I reeeeally don’t like Cena, but there is no way you can say Hogan was better in the ring with a straight face.
the sad thing is long before us open challenge and going into part-time more, people always forget cena was always good in ring even with his limited moveset by putting unforgettable matches with edge, orton, rvd, jbl, angle, hbk, hhh, rock, punk, lesnar, umaga and even khali not to mention he always amazing on promos. he is everything that you wanted to be top guy and face of the company due to his hard work and charisma. cena earned respect from people especially those who hated him back between 2015 and 2018 like he should during his run as top guy and that made them realize that vince held him back with his outdated 80’s booking style because he was still stuck in the past. cena gave it all to us in order to entertain us every night with this crappy booking and his limited moveset because of his dedication for the business. looking back, cena was the unfortunate victim of everything IWC hated that represented wwe during pg era creatively, booking wise and roster wise because guys like edge, hbk, batista retired and left while others like hhh, taker went part-time mode. cena was put in weird situations and storylines with wrong opponents with lack of chemistry like miz, r-truth, del rio and ryback not to mention guys like established star like orton and big show who lost their appeal during pg era. and cena managed to make it work and understood the art of performing in ring as white meat top babyface despite crappy booking that vince gave to him and people booed and hated him. i respect him for that. people forget that wwe was receiving PR and mainstream backlash for the benoit incident and cena managed to get wwe out of the turmoil that the company had to deal at the time and he was the right guy to carry the company through grim times especially during creatively ill fated pg era. if wasn’t for cena being the guy, wwe would be in big trouble and out of business especially during the benoit incident. i think the hardcore fans who blindly hated cena during his pg supercena era where the same ones who loved him during his word life/thug cena era all the way to the top whose were also attitude era fans. the reason that cena had a better time at the top despite his crappy booking because of his unmatched work ethic, his longevity due to his safe moveset which prevented him from getting injured, his connection with the crowd especially those who booed him and his hard work. the fact the cena was able to stay at the top for a decade was insane. that showed it was a true testament to his talents and skills as in-ring perfomer especially during pg era and his supercena run and he managed to made it work i tell you what and what happened with the product at the time showed that whether smarks wanna admit or not, from the moment that cena went to part-time mode, the product at the time until summer 2022 especially in 2018 and 2019 wasn’t the same and was lacking of star power because love him or hate him, cena brought all the greatness, passion and intensity for the product and the fans even those who hated him while he was full time. the moment cena gonna retires, IWC gonna regret big time for not recognizing his greatness until he went part-time because they had no idea how bad the product at the time gonna be when cena went away especially with babyface roman and lesnar as top guys at the expense of the audience. cena is the last legit megastar that wwe ever had.
People talking about technical skills are seriously lost here.
No. I don't even consider him even top 20. I did a recent rewatch of his career and segments to reevaluate him. He was my favorite wrestler from 2004 to 2006. I used to defend him against the growing hate in the IWC. But by road to WrestleMania 22, I got sick of him and disliked him since then. Upon reevaluating him, in the ring, he was mediocre to average. He's had great matches with some of the best wrestlers of his generation though. But on the average show, he wasn't so great. His selling sucked and it's been my belief that it's part of the reason he got turned on by a portion of the crowd. Lots of his moves don't look great. He gave a great effort in big matches so it's not like he was lazy. I'm not as high on his matches vs Khali, Orton (2007 SummerSlam) and Umaga that his strongest proponents online used to point to as evidence of him being great. As a talker, he was entertaining until he lost his rapper personality. Then he had the most painful promos, saying the corniest stuff and coming off so hokey. He doesn't book himself but he definitely had the power to reject this crap. Watch an early 2005 promo of Cena vs. a 2012 era. Night and day. The company needed him to be less edgy as they headed into the PG era but it didn't need to be that bad. From a crowd reaction standpoint, he got the crowd to care about him a lot. He was very over. However I can't highly rate a Babyface who got regularly booked like he did. He was a stagnant character. I don't know how much he controlled this, but as a person watching the program, it got dull. I felt we missed out on some great run like Hollywood Rock or NWO. The Cenation leader was honestly one of the most insufferable main event Babyface gimmicks as it was happening. Rewatching it, didn't help. I feel he's a 7.5/10. Great company man who did what he was told to a fault.
In merch, perhaps. His matches were terrible. That whole WWE style was vomit.
Big Show said that he felt most secure when Cena lifted him out of anyone, his functional strength is insane. Wrestling skill is mid, look is great for a wrestler, he sells it on the mic, and has a ton of charisma with crowds. With that being said, top 5 best wrestlers in the past 50 years is a tall order. Personally even though I like Cena and he broke into Hollywood successfully, i say no.
depends on ur definition of wrestler, drawing power - yes, impact - yes, in-ring ability - okay, charisma - yes, making himself and the company money - fuck yes