WWE News: John Cena Tweets "History Happens Tonight"
For better or worse, it appears John Cena is very confident heading into his match with Dolph Ziggler..
Sunday morning, Cena took to Twitter with the following:
Cena (@JohnCena) December 16, 2012
Ultimately, this could mean that Cena will indeed be victorious over "The Show-Off" and become the first man to win two Money in the Bank briefcases in the same year.
However, it could also mean that if he does win, he will be cashing in tonight against the winner of Sheamus-Big Show.
Either way, this does not bode well for Ziggler.
Especially considering how hard he has worked in the past year to get to this point only to have his moment once again stripped away from him. Ultimately, the WWE is in a bit of a bind tonight, as this is the first pay-per-view in quite sometime in which the WWE title will not be defended.
Let's face it, without the WWE title or champion having any presence on the card, the company needs to do something to make this pay-per-view memorable.
And, what better way to do so, than to have the face of the company close the show with the next best thing around his waist?
Overall, if Cena were to pull this off, the landscape of the shows wouldn't change much. The fact is, the "brand split" really hasn't applied to many stars on the roster. I mean honestly, how many times have you tuned into either show and witnessed a brand specific feud spilling over onto the other brand?
To me, it appears that the WWE has all but abandoned the "Brand Extension" and is solely focusing on the stars that are making money and allowing them to appear on both shows.
So, if Cena does win the Blue Brand's title tonight, he will still be featured prominently on WWE's flagship show Raw.
In the end, I am hopeful that the WWE has something big in store for tonight as it could allow them to end the year on a high-note.
Let's just hope, that it's not at Dolph Ziggler's expense.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?