WWE News: Wade Keller Uses Macho Man's Death To Tell You Why He'll Never Be Cena

If you went dumpster diving this weekend, you may have come across a rather asinine article written by PWTorch editor Wade Keller.

In an apparent by-product of the rapture, Keller uses expert timing, in the wake of Macho Man Randy Savage's death, to poorly defend his controversial (and panned) stance that John Cena ranks higher on the all-time list of WWE greats than Randy Savage.

It should be noted that I am in the minority of pro wrestling pundits who like John Cena.  I consider myself somewhat of a John Cena apologist who thinks Cena is underrated as a wrestler and admires Cena's pure dedication to his craft as a pro wrestler. 

However, by no means does that make him better than Randy Savage in any sense of the word. 

Using rapture-esque logic that M. Knight Shyamalan would find fault with, Keller's basic thesis states that John Cena's status as the top guy in WWE propels him ahead of Randy Savage, whose legacy is admissibly compromised by the fact that he was always viewed as a No. 2 star behind Hulk Hogan.

"

"Cena has been a singular centerpiece for WWE for several years now. He's not playing back-up or even co-star with anyone right now."

"With Randy Savage, he almost always had someone at his level or higher who carried the weight of the promotion."

"

Simply taking a wrestler's status in the company and projecting it in terms of historical analysis  is hardly an accurate method of compiling any all-time list of worth. 

Context comes into play here as one must read between the lines of what it means (or meant) to be a star in a given era of pro wrestling. 

John Cena is a star during a diluted era of wrestling where WWE has slumped significantly in key areas including, but not limited to, live event revenue, TV ratings and pay-per-view buys. 

Meanwhile, Savage was a star in wrestling during a golden age where his stardom propelled him to the mainstream status that John Cena will likely never achieve. 

Keller seems to be more enamored by John Cena as a retail item than John Cena as a wrestler.  And using Keller's logic, Jeff Jarrett should be ranked higher on the hierarchy of wrestling greats as he carried a dysfunctional WCW brand as world champion in its dying days.

I'd argue that John Cena isn't even carrying the weight of WWE on his shoulders but rather the "wait" of WWE on his shoulders as pro wrestling fans wait for another golden age during a transitional period.  

Keller's "top dog" logic is silly enough in the context of pro wrestling, but if it were to be used to assess an athlete or performer in any other genre, it would be exponentially as nutty. 

Take the NBA, for example.  Scottie Pippen's legacy will always be that he was Robin to Michael Jordan's Batman on a handful of championship Chicago Bulls teams.  Yet he played, brilliantly, during a period where the NBA had ascended to unprecedented levels of popularity thanks to the Jordan era. 

Keeping the "top dog" logic in mind, Allen Iverson was the unquestioned leader of the Philadelphia 76ers.  As a former MVP, Iverson was the face of a new, post-Jordan era defined by tattoos, durags, swagger and shoot-first point guards hungry for the spotlight. 

It was an era that NBA Commissioner David Stern sought to destroy, as the NBA was quickly garnering a reputation as a "thug" league, and eventually did due in part to the implementation of a controversial dress code. 

Comparing the legacies of Scottie Pippen as a No. 2 guy (Randy Savage) and Allen Iverson as a top guy during a period of sinking popularity in the NBA (John Cena), one would be hard pressed to find Allen Iverson ranked higher than Scottie Pippen on any all-time list published by a credible publication. 

Keller goes on to state that Savage being part of a "star-studded" ensemble cast on WCW Nitro hurts his legacy. 

"

"[Randy Savage] was part of a star-studded ensemble cast in the WCW Nitro era. He was a notch under Hogan as a draw during their days in the WWF."

"

The article fails to mention the fact that Savage became a multiple-time World Champion on that star-studded roster and enjoyed a pair of world championship reigns in his days as a top star in the WWF with Hulk Hogan on the roster. 

I would argue that, in an individual field of sports entertainment, Savage's ability to win the top prize on a star-studded cast is more of a testament to his greatness than an indictment of it.

A more contemporary NBA example is enough to diffuse the star power theory presented by Wade Keller. 

Miami Heat forward/guard LeBron James will likely be playing on a star-studded Heat roster for the rest of his career alongside the likes of NBA all stars Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade. 

Meanwhile, Bulls point guard Derrick Rose, reigning MVP, is the only superstar on the No. 1 seeded Chicago Bulls. 

Despite James being surrounded with more talent, there is not a single NBA pundit worth his or her salt who feels that Derrick Rose is or will be better than LeBron James when all is said and done.

LeBron James' value on a star-studded cast will surely translate to more championships for James than Rose (Lebron's Heat currently lead Rose's Bulls 2-1 in the Eastern Conference Finals), just as Randy Savage's value on a star-studded WCW roster—which contributed to the near downfall of WWE—stand out more than John Cena as a top guy during a rebuilding era. 

Keller's lone point of worth concludes that John Cena has had more high profile matches than the Macho Man Randy Savage. 

This is correct, although context once again comes into play as John Cena is wrestling in an era of WWE where both the pay-per-view and TV markets are saturated with  programming (something the article does mention). 

It's hard to say how many free Randy Savage main events one would be treated to in this era of pro wrestling.  Disregarding the eras of pro wrestling, breaking down how many high profile matches Cena and Savage have had is quite nitpicky.  Keller's zeroing in on the high profile matches of John Cena, and Randy Savage is punctured by the fact that Savage's best matches are taken into a higher regard than Cena's best matches.

Likewise, Allen Iverson had more 40-point games than Scottie Pippen, but Scottie still ranks higher in terms of greatness.     

If wrestling is to be defined as a field of sports entertainment, ranking all-time greats can simpler than many pundits make it out to be.  Randy Savage was a better athlete (sport), wrestler (sport) and a bigger star (entertainment).  Case closed.

Your girlfriend, who doesn't watch pro wrestling, doesn't know who John Cena is.  She knows who Randy Savage is, and that simple tidbit could be considered a knockout blow to Cena given the edge Savage's already has in the wrestling department. 

It is easy to be romanced by history and death when it comes to historical analysis.  However, one needs little personal biased or reverence towards Randy Savage to consider his legacy greater than that the already impressive legacy that John Cena will one day submit into to pro wrestling lore. 

Considering the legendary career of the "Macho Man" Randy Savage, a petty Cena vs. Savage debate is the last item that should be discussed in memory of a career that featured so many great moments and memories.  

A simple "R.I.P. Randy Poffo" would have sufficed. 

Big Nasty is a contributor to FightLife Magazine.  Follow him on Twitter @ThisIsNasty.