Excuses

Hi Scott,

I'm not sure where I heard about this, whether it was an article or a podcast, but I remember John Cena saying about getting negative reactions during his matches being a GOOD thing. One example was when he and Orton battled it out for the WWE WHC and the crowd sh*t all over it and started the 'Daniel Bryan' chants. He says that any reaction during a match is a good thing as it shows that the fans are 'into' it. I have to disagree.

For me, babyfaces should be cheered and heels should be booed – simple as that. It seemed as though Cena was trying to excuse not getting the right reactions. I know there are a million and one rants/articles/debates about the Cena character etc but surely if he (or any babyface) is getting negative reaction then they're not doing their job as a babyface (other than him being stale as hell)?

And yes, he IS a babyface; I know there are those that say he is a face to children etc etc, and a heel to older males, but that's crap – he doesn't cheat, he always does the noble thing, he always panders to the audience: none of these things/traits are heel-like. Despite those that boo, he is presented as a babyface.

What is your take on babyfaces getting the 'wrong' reactions (and heels getting positive reactions when, surely, their job is to be hated?!)? Are WWE just assuming that we will cheer and boo for who we're meant to?

Keep up the good work on the blog!

​Clearly they should turn Cena heel and it would fix everything.  
The problem with Cena is more that his material is just so bad.  If he wasn't booked to win EVERY match or be incredibly protected in his losses, or even show a bit of vulnerability sometimes, people would be more inclined to actually cheer him.  But when he shakes off every setback and makes poopy jokes the day after a supposed career-defining loss, he's just not likable.  But yes, WWE just assumes we will cheer and boo who they tell us to, which is why the Daniel Bryan thing was such a fight on both sides.  ​