"Top 10 Topics IWC Fans Won't Shut Up About: Do You Recognize Any Of Them?

I apologize in advance for anything you may find satirical or immature.  

"I'm sick of all these people talkin' out their heads. I've never understood a damn thing that they said. From words to actions, not knowin' what they're about...'Saliva-I Walk Alone; Batista's theme.

Time and time again have you heard it, folks: The very repetitive things that come out wrestling fans' mouth. Oh, so many things they say that make fans like me think, "Oh, my God, will you please shut up?!"

From the fans that I've been around and from the many thoughts I have heard, there would be few words to describe some of things they say: Generic, monotonous, annoying, unoriginal, and, dare I say it, stupid.

Now, when it comes to me being around the select amount of people, I tend to voice opinions that a lot share and many, well, don't. But, not all thoughts they say are bad. Some may make you engage in deep pondering and some are those of which most, if not all, people agree on.

Many of those, in response to my opinions like these, tend to think I'm just some intolerant individual, who doesn't know much about wrestling or its fans.   Well, on the contrary, I tend to pay attention to the latter as much as I would a wrestling program: Very, very frequently.  

Now, I've been watching wrestling since 2005 (since age 11, the age where I began to see that Cartoon Network was changing for the worse), so I may not have that much credibility compared to other veteran fans anywhere, let alone Bleacher Report.

So, when it comes to some of the WWE fans, what do we have? I can tell you one thing, fans of WWE (and/or other wrestling promotions) make up an assortment of individuals in the World Wide Web, and although I can't actually discern accurate percentages, those fans in the IWC go in these demographics:

The smarks, veteran fans, novice fans, oblivious fans, the lovers and haters, and the immature. I'm not going to use the word 'mark' because that's kind of polemic.  

Now, those categorizations are somewhat accurate. These fans have common, but differentiating opinions, according to those who go into of one of those demographics (there may be some who make up an amalgamation of the categories, like "smark/novice fans").  

But, for some of those opinions, lies those that I can't seem to figure out or get annoyed with. I mean, I know I should respect them, but sometimes some of things that these fans say just really get me worked up, you know?  So, without further ado, let's take a look at some of things that some of these fans often say.

10."Get Rid Of Nexus! They're Boring!"

In my opinion, the Nexus was one of the best things to happen to RAW, and in a slowly deteriorating promotion, what better way to work up fans by allowing a team of rookies to trash the ring, beat-up officials, choke ring announcers with their own ties, assault the company draw [Cena, of course] and the Chairman of the promotion, take out legendary wrestlers, take Bret Hart on demolition derby, and have control over the face of WWE? Was this not borderline "TV-14"? Or, do you miss that they were doing that and want them to return to their edgier sides?

It's pretty perplexing to see that some fans, who criticize WWE for being "PG" despite what violent things they've done, consider them boring. Now, this may not seem like a complete argument, considering some fans think that the reason the Nexus is boring is because RAW has been been perpetuating this storyline for quite some time.

The only rebuttal I can give is this: So have Cena's storylines, and all some fans do is call Cena boring, as well as Orton and other wrestlers. I'm sure some of you guys out there were happy [and/or surprised] to see Cena out on a gurney.

For a little while, the WWE has centered storylines on the same people, so expect some, if not many, storylines not involving Nexus to be 'boring' in the near future.

Aside from them being "boring", some fans don't like Nexus because they're "cowards" or "don't fight fair". Well, what else is a heel stable like them supposed to do? Please, tell me. They're heels, they don't need to "fight fair."

Besides, Cena didn't fight fair when he tied Batista to the ring-post at Extreme Rules or when he was a heel in 2005. But, I'm sure the deal-breaker for some was when Nexus ganged up on The Undertaker. They're heels, what they do is supposed to make you say things like that.

Plus, there were many of the fans saying how WWE should push young/new talent, so we wouldn't have to see faces like John Cena or Orton all of the time. Sheamus and Swagger's pushes were ruined, who's to say that the creative team did something wrong?

Furthermore, when was the last time we had a heel-stable to shake things up in WWE? I'm sure whatever the answer is, in the common fan's perspective, it was a pretty long time ago.

9. "I've Been Watching the WWE Since...Stand Up for WWE!"

Another common theme in the IWC; Now, granted, your love for this wrestling promotion has spanned as far as the company itself, and I'm sure WWE appreciates your endeavors and patronage. But, the truth is, nobody really cares.

I mean, Vince himself does not even care: He just wants your money. The only reason why Vince ran this campaign was because of his wife, who used WWE for her campaign, and here you are, still saying this.

They needed somebody to make them look good, so why not use the fans to help Linda out? People are out here are still saying things like, "I've been a fan of WWE for [number of years]. They've given us so many great matches and events, and I think it's time to stand up for WWE!"

Now, they say this almost as if they were told to do so or they don't even realize that this was part of  WWE's plan to help get support for Linda, albeit she lost. I'm sure there's some people out there reading this, thinking I'm jealous all because I'm a 5-year-wrestling-fan who decided to call out supporters of WWE who were, in fact, veteran fans of the promotion.

Well, the truth is, I'm just addressing those who refuse to cease this bedeviling banter. I'm not out to pick a fight with fans, I just think this is pretty annoying. Of course, some fans respond to this by saying, "I stand up for TV-14!"

8. "Bring Back [Wrestler/Writer/Authority Figure's Name]!"

When you hear things like this, sometimes you wonder, "Hmm, when is [he or she] coming back?" But, after a while, it's starts to become annoying. You have those who try to start rumors like, 'Triple H is scheduled to return at,' without any proof or source as to how they came across this information.

Then, you have those who won't stop saying, 'Come back to the WWE, HBK! We need you,' actually going to his Twitter page just overwhelming the guy.

Shawn said it himself, he spent more time in WWE than he did with his own family; So many years of family bonding lost to wrestling and traveling, so many wrestlers who left WWE to pursue other interests, so many people leaving WWE because they had a falling out behind-the-scenes, making it abundantly clear that they weren't returning to WWE with little to no exceptions.

"Lita came back, didn't she?" She only came because of Pee-Wee Herman, who was guest hosting at the time, she had, like, less than 8 seconds of screen time, plus we didn't see a match. All we can do is hope and dream. It's time to live and let go.

The Rock isn't coming back, Shawn Michaels isn't coming back, Steve Austin may come back for one more match (and it may be in TNA), Triple H may just stay behind the scenes, and Paul Heyman is never coming back.

Steve Austin also guest hosted on March 15, 2010, but it was probably just to promote that direct-to-DVD movie he was in. Come on, it's not like we saw a Stunner. He teased for one the first match on that night [Cena Vs. Big Show].

7."Taker's Streak Should End/Taker's Streak Should Be Left Intact."

Now, this was probably ranked too low. For me, it's hard to for me to take any of the two sides because, well, both sides have pretty strong points. On the pro-streak side, they say that The Undertaker's streak should be left intact because their aren't any wrestlers on any of the rosters, with the exception of Jericho, that are worthy of ending his streak.

Besides that, The Undertaker, as old as he his, is getting ready to retire soon. Pro-streak fans feel as if as if if he were to lose, his legendary career will always be tarnished with an ink-blot.

18-1 will always make a fan cringe when they take a look at The Undertaker's career, well, that and that botched head dive at WrestleMania 25. He might as well should keep it because he might not even be at WrestleMania 27.

On the anti-steak side, they say The Undertaker's streak should end because a match with Kane, Edge, Cena, Sheamus, CM Punk or Chris Jericho (the only people who they say are seemingly worthy to end The Undertaker's streak) would end up being bad and a match with Triple H (whenever he's returning) and Orton has already been done.

The chances of legends returning to face The Undertaker isn't even slim. Besides that, another win would be boring. What would he do after he won? Would he cut a promo about going back to hell or something? That's way too predictable.

The entire build-up leading to the match would be horrible with the mediocre, creative writing we've been seeing, and it would be nice to see some drama inside (kayfabe) and outside the ring (from fans and/or wrestlers) with a loss.

Anti-streak fans also say that it's The Undertaker himself who should be legendary, not his streak. On the neutral side of things, some say, "We'll wait and see." I know whose side I'm on.  

6. "Randy Orton Is the New Stone Cold Steve Austin!"

Rattlesnake= Viper;  Of course, that's the only similarity that I can think of: Nicknames. Other than that, you can't say he's like Stone Cold all because of his finisher and nickname. You can't say he's better than Steve Austin all because of his number of title reigns, looks, and how he sells his character.

Title reigns, for one thing, are determined by the creative writers. Some may argue that Orton's physical conditioning was superior to that of Steve's, but take into consideration the severity of the injuries he's received. I'm not going to mention the incident with Owen Hart because that should be pretty obvious. Injuries impair a wrestler's ability in-ring (once again, depending on the injury.) Allow me cite an article someone wrote on this site to help my argument:

1."Randy Orton is a tall, quick, strong, defined, and coordinated. His physical condition is impeccable, his timing in the ring is superb." ;

People say the same thing about John Cena. How many people have said he was just as good as Orton, if not better? Besides, you know, "the biased ones"? The human condition is determined not just by exercise and dietary habits, but age, as well. I'm sure an opinion like that would change, if you saw Austin in his prime, physically speaking. (Stunning Steve Austin)

2."Randy Orton's character has evolved but been steady and entertaining for years. He transformed from an arrogant yet gifted athlete to a ruthless and heartless predator in the ring."

Austin's character, albeit it was simplistic, was effective.The way he projected to the crowd was what made him popular. A character is able to evolve by direction of the wrestler's merit, the creative department, and, perhaps, fan influence. Besides that, Orton's character didn't "evolve," he just went from "Legend-Killer" to "Viper", which, in my opinion, are two different gimmicks.

Lastly, as far as I'm concerned, he's only being booked like Austin. Generally speaking, comparing a wrestler to another, although it is a common form of characterizing a wrestler, isn't exactly reliable.

5. "John Cena Sucks!/Randy Orton Sucks!"

*I know, the picture looks a little fruity, but it was only to mock the immature haters.*

This, also, was probably ranked too low. Me, I'm not really a fan of Cena or Orton, but it's pretty amazing how so many people have jumped on this bandwagon. Hate of these wrestlers and their fans have spanned so much, I feel stupid just for not liking them, but I'll get flamed if do.

Constantly do you hear, "John Cena is overrated; He has five moves; Cena can't wrestle." or "Randy Orton is overrated; RKO sucks; The only reason why he main-events is because of father's influence". Jeez, every time, "

Hating a wrestler is one thing, but when you go as far as to make a video-slideshow of image macros depicting Cena as a homosexual, who puts his face in everyone's crotches, well, now, that's just annoying. Some fans don't like Cena or Orton because of the perpetual repetitiveness in most of their matches, while the less credible arguments include, "He's overrated and has 5 moves." So what?

Some wrestlers have an arsenal of moves and only end up using less than several of them in matches or some of their moves aren't even used at all. When was the last time Edge used "The Edgecator"?

Bill Goldberg's character, during his run with WCW, was initially powerful, but the monster-heel character, just like Cena's "Superman" gimmick, started to become repetitive. As for him being booked, his matches were mostly against jobbers or undercarders every week, while in the WWE he was booked pretty well, but his character continued to deteriorate.

Fans only liked him because he "destroyed" people. For his wrestling skills, come on, he couldn't sell a move without hurting someone. He virtually ended Bret Hart's career with a careless kick to the head, resulting in a severe concussion.

Promotion-wise, in WCW, storylines usually involved the nWo taking people out, or Goldberg in a squash match...I'm not saying he's like John Cena or even Cena is better than Goldberg, I'm saying Goldberg wasn't as good as people remembered him to be. Goldberg's success is partially credited to him being over-hyped.  Yet, the haters overlooked his blatant flaws, as well as other notable wrestlers, in favor of calling Orton and Cena gay.  Really?

4. "OMG, HE IS SOOOOO HOT!"

Oh, blessed are some of the female fans of the WWE Universe, who care not for the talent of a wrestler, but his chest. When John Morrison comes out, what do hear? High-pitched screams. When John Cena appears, what do you hear? High-pitched screams.

When Randy Orton appeared, you used to hear raucous booing, but now--now you hear high-pitched screams. When Daniel Bryan came out with his Ride of the Valkyries theme, what did you hear? Canned pop and scattered cheering, as well as Cole being a jerk.

I don't like to be the one to talk about the 'real fans of wrestling', I'm a 5-year-fan, but this is ridiculous.  I mean, I know your love of a wrestler makes you spew hormonal expletives, but just because you think a wrestler is hot doesn't make him a good.

Sure, us male fans tend to marvel and lust at the beauty (and busts) of Divas, but the majority of them can't wrestle anyway, with the exception of few. Still, we tend to recognize those Divas with legitimate skills. Take Layla for instance, she's not as good a wrestler as Michelle McCool, but she is pretty good on the mic.

Michelle, on the other hand, her mic skills could use some fine tuning, but they are improving. Don't get me wrong, I still know of the actual female fans of wrestling, I just wish there were more of them.  

Now, the reason I included this is because a friend of mine posted on her Facebook a list of her top sexiest celebrities, with John Cena as one of them. As I proceeded to say "CENA SUCKS! HE CAN'T WRESTLE!", (I'm not contradicting myself, I was trolling her) she said, "I couldn't care less about his wrestling skills. He's sexy."

A friend of mine, who wasn't even a wrestling fan just told me he was sexy. Now, I as continued to go on with her, she said I was jealous...oy.

That's the whole point, fans like them don't care for wrestling skills, they just care about the torso of a wrestler. Which leads me to this, they, at first, didn't like wrestling, but when they saw Randy Orton's body while they were channel surfing, they got hooked.

There's no use in arguing with them on wrestling skills because they'll just say, "You're just jealous because he looks better than you." I don't want to hear that and they probably shouldn't even be watching wrestling if that's all they look forward to.

For some of the female fans out there reading this, who like both the body of a wrestler and his skills or just his skills, I didn't forget about real, female fans of wrestling, those who prefer skills (but can enjoy looks at the same time). You're awesome.

But, what about the male fans who only watch wrestling for the Divas' bodies (if they exist)? The same thing applies and I shake my head in puzzlement. I understand you like the wrestler, but don't overlook the skills of his or another's in favor of aesthetics.

3. "TNA SUCKS!/WWE SUCKS!"

All too common in the Internet Wrestling Community, you find WWE and TNA fans arguing over which promotion is better. To say the least, "they cross streams." It's just like the PC Vs. Mac arguments, as in both sides need to shut up. Why can't we all just be wrestling fans? Now, when it comes to TNA haters, you always hear something along the lines of, "TNA is a retirement home for old wrestlers and WWE washouts! " and the common "TNgAy" phrase.

Well, I'm sure there's more, but that's all I hear: That, and the audiences are too small, plus the storylines are derivative of those from WCW. Now, I watch TNA, and it's a pretty decent promotion, in my opinion.

The only problems I see are the fact that Hogan and Bischoff are the ones running things, Russo is still in the picture, Jeff Jarrett really doesn't have that much control over the promotion anymore, and the frequent appearances of over-established wrestlers that we've seen one-milltion times since the 70's.  Those factors contribute to TNA slowly becoming worse, including some of the other old wrestlers (except for Sting).

The TNA tag-team divisions, although they are better than the WWE's in most, if not every, aspect, all they have is Team 3D (who retired), MCMG, Beer Money, Generation Me, London Brawling, and a couple of other jobber tag-teams.

But, when compared to the WWE's tag-team division, that's all that TNA really needs.  But, then there are the WWE haters/TNA fans. 

In my opinion, TNA fans are just as bad. With TNA fans, you always hear something along the lines of, "WWE is a kids show with no blood and cursing. It's all about 'PG' and stupid kids! All they care about is ratings and merchandise!" That's weird. I've seen kids in TNA audiences and TNA, like every other wrestling promoton, markets merchandise.The only problems concerning the WWE are the misuse of...oh, who am I kidding? WWE doesn't use their tag-team division or the Divas division at all. It seems as if the WWE is solely focused on it's popular, singles main-eventers, never to really stay consistent or put the spotlight on wrestlers like Zack Ryder, Yoshi Tatsu, Evan Bourne, Mark Henry, and Primo. Plus, the WWE seems to focus on looks, mic skills, charisma, and gimmicks rather than wrestling talent or the style of wrestling used itself.

WWE pays attention on one story and tend not to give storylines to other wrestlers. The only other ones we see are vignettes or in-ring segments with Santino, Kozlov, Goldust, and Ted DiBiase Jr. all in the name of comedy, not to mention the lack of titles. What? The WWE's content rating? Well, that's always the problem with everybody, isn't it..?

Now, when it comes to arguing with WWE haters, they tend to call WWE fans 'marks', not even realizing that they're 'marking-out' to TNA. They call themselves 'real wrestling fans', not taking to considering that those who watch the WWE also watch TNA, ROH, NJPW, etc.

To TNA fans, WWE fans are just a bunch of stupid, oblivious "marks" who know nothing about a real wrestling promotion. They constantly point out flaws of the WWE without taking a look at TNA's own foibles.

They tend to make naive generalizations about fans of WWE. But, it's not like TNA haters don't do the same thing. Can't we all just get along? No? Aww...But, I don't like to think that some fans don't like the promotion itself, just it's flaws.

2."The WWE Title and The WHC Title Need To Be Unified!"

A lot of people have said that at WrestleMania 27, the WWE should unify the WWE Championship and the World Heavyweight Championship and/or the U.S Championship and the Intercontinental Championship.

For what? So more people can start complaining about how their favorite wrestlers don't get title opportunities? So more people can complain about how the WWE needs to bring back titles, like the Cruiserweight Championship or the Hardcore Championship? Well, the Cruiserweight Championship died when Hornswoggle got it, so bringing it back would suggest that the WWE really won't take it seriously.

If both those primary and secondary titles were unified, imagine the negative feedback that would come from it. The WWE Divas title usurping the Women's Championship title, which lasted for 50 years, was a major disappointment to WWE fans and Divas alike. Just look at what Mickie James said:

"The retirement of the Women’s Championship breaks my heart. The nostalgia and the legacy built off the backs of every woman who paved the way for women like me… Who gave it credibility… Honor… Prestige… & Truth! For every woman who’s carried the championship through the generations… Who know the power & history you feel in holding it high above your head.. That can never be replaced by anything in my mind… In my heart… I am truly honored and forever grateful to be among the women who have graced its presence… Thank you…"; "

“Dont worry, there's now 2 butterfly belts!”-Carlito; In order to cover up that elephant-sized mistake, they decided to turn the Divas Championship into pseudo-tag team championship belts-- garbage! The WWE markets it's female wrestlers as "Divas", not women wrestlers, so I guess it isn't that much of a loss, considering the WWE's Divas division is already a lost cause.

We've lost too many titles to the six current titles in the WWE, and unifications would only mean more bad reception. We'd be stuck with the "WWE Unified World Heavy Weight Championship" and the "International Championship".

That's four titles and the fans have the nerve to say that RAW and Smackdown should "unify" to become one, three-hour show. I tried thinking of the benefits of that, but all I could think of was the fact that no one would have to wait for an episode of RAW or Smackdown  to come on.

Everything else was just bad: No wrestling fan would have anything to look forward to on Mondays or Fridays, everything would be on one show for one day of the week; Things would be a little harder to keep up with; I have to listen to Michael Cole, Todd Grisham, and Matt Striker go off-topic every five seconds of a match, with Jerry Lawler barely holding any tenure during the commentary.

1."The WWE Needs to Bring Back the Attitude Era!/The WWE Needs TV-14 Back!"

No matter where you go in the IWC, this is always a concern with wrestling fans: The WWE needs to bring back TV-14. No, we don't. We hear it all the time and it doesn't stop or go away. Every wrestling fan feels as if the WWE needs a content change in order to better itself.

The truth is, we don't need TV-14. Why? What defines a wrestling promotion? Well-executed matches all in the name of entertainment, or blood, cursing, and sexual allusions? Do we not get enough of that in action movies and pornography?

When you say you want blood, you're pretty much saying, 'I don't care for the well-being of the blader, I just want to see it'. When you say you want chair shots to the head, you're saying, 'I don't care for the cumulative repercussions of concussions and head trauma, I just want to see it.' I'm usually labeled stupid for saying things like this...

The WWE's situation concerns the negligence of Vince McMahon and the lack-luster writing of the current creative team, but some of you argue that the only reason why our writers are doing so bad is because, with the content rating, the writers are restricted from utilizing their full potential. In other words, they aren't flexible with PG.

TNA has Vince Russo, the man credited for destroying WCW, with little to no content restriction, he has all the flexibility he needs to make blood, cursing, and sexual references entertaining---and he'll still be a bad writer.

He tried too hard to provide violent, edgier storylines for the fans, with twists and turns, and that's what caused the destruction of WCW. Who's to say that if we're given a content change, the same thing won't happen to the WWE? The promotion's storylines were so poorly written that the WWE would go bankrupt because the fans were in favor of other promotions, like TNA, ROH, NJPW, etc.. "But, this is why we need Paul Heyman back!" What did I just say in slide 7?!

Besides all of that, with the current rosters, writers, and storylines, how would a new Attitude Era compare to the old one? Put one in each hand and see what you have: "Attitude" in one hand and feces in the other.

Along with that, with the PTC and other parental/political groups hounding the WWE for the content exhibited in the Attitude Era, the WWE was bound to go PG (again). Before the Attitude Era, we had the Golden Age and the New Generation Age, both of which were, in fact, PG rated.

Yet, so many people loved the Attitude Era so much, they began to go on tirades, blaming the likes of Cena, Rey Mysterio, and Linda McMahon for something that wasn't even their fault and for something that technically existed until the Attitude Era came into the picture.

People tend to forget that the reason why the Attitude Era came into existence was because of the ratings war between the WWF and WCW. It was an era, eras come and go.

With the many great storylines, events, and wrestlers in the Attitude Era, many people seemed to confuse content attributes to wrestlers and the composition of the writing (blood, cursing, etc), and with the current quality of the writing, the notable wrestlers and authority figures (associated to the Attitude Era), new talent coming in, the fans looked at the two, glared at the children, and called it the "PG Era" or "Cena Era". A lot of people thought the WWE was appealing to just children, when really they were trying to appealing to a multitudinous demographic, families included.

Even if that wasn't the case, too many factors would have lead the WWE to become PG: The FCC, the PTC, the Lionel Tate incident, government action, and Chris Benoit's death.

Lastly, not everyone is a hardcore wrestling fan. As said beforehand, the WWE is trying to appeal to an  eclectic group of people. Their intentions are good, but aren't exactly executed right. If you're a hardcore wrestling fan, that's okay, but don't bash WWE all because of its level of content.

Conclusion

Oy, sometimes when I lose my patience, I tend to act on impulsiveness. I guess that's the reason I wrote this article. I've heard so many of the fans just parrot the same things over and over. I know writing this would never help it, but it sure felt good to vent some of this out. 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, yeah, I know that, but when some opinions are uttered, tensions rise and tempers flare.

Thank you for reading my first, incredibly-long article.