Jalen Schmidt
New member
I've been reading forum after forum talking about how John Morrison or Evan Bourne have "no mic skills, charisma, personality, etc." and yet, they're over with the crowd, both have had pushes with moderate success, and they're ring work is much better than the Main Eventers themselves.
Since when did having mic skills become a more important factor than in-ring skills? Basically, you can utterly suck at a match but still be at Main Event status so long as you have good people skills? Morrison and Bourne are both amazing in the ring. Morrison is currently on his way to Main Event status, after being on a roll, and Cena's obviously high on Bourne that most of the IWC can see him going for a title shot soon.
While I do agree with that they both sound like children on the mic, you can't deny their athletic ability in the ring and their ability to get the crowd hyped up during and after the match. Look at Bret Hart, the guy's mic skills are mediocre at best and look where he is now: an established Hall of Famer who got by with his ring work rather than mic skills.
Frankly, people are just jumping on the bandwagon to bash these two amazing superstars for NO logical reason, such as when they jumped on the "Hate Cena" bandwagon for no reason. What's even more pathetic is the fact that Cena has an amazing work ethic, puts over younger talent, and obviously has passion for working in the WWE, and people hate the guy regardless.
You all hate Cena, even though he has phenomenal mic work, but a limited moveset? And you all hate Morrison and Bourne because they've no mic skills but even though they've top-notch ring-ability? Then again, I've seen criticisms of them just because they're faces, and all faces suck, right?
I'm wanting someone to give me a decent opinion, or perhaps find someone who agrees with me on this. I honestly think that Morrison and Bourne (along with Bryan, Jackson, and other mid-carders) will soon be carrying the company years to come, but that's my opinion based on how far they've come and the crowd reaction. The fact that people go around saying "morrison sucks he should never be champion cuz he'll never improve no matter what he tries..." is just blatant and harsh.
I just want to know why mic work is much more praised than ring-ability. I thought just being good in the ring would be enough to elevate you, seeing as how some superstars have acheived gold and fame that way.
*If you're going to bash and waste time with non-sensical answers, then don't even try.*
Morrison and Bourne are still young. People need to learn to give them time to improve; practicing on their mic skills, getting into a strong feud...etc.
Any opinions on this?
Since when did having mic skills become a more important factor than in-ring skills? Basically, you can utterly suck at a match but still be at Main Event status so long as you have good people skills? Morrison and Bourne are both amazing in the ring. Morrison is currently on his way to Main Event status, after being on a roll, and Cena's obviously high on Bourne that most of the IWC can see him going for a title shot soon.
While I do agree with that they both sound like children on the mic, you can't deny their athletic ability in the ring and their ability to get the crowd hyped up during and after the match. Look at Bret Hart, the guy's mic skills are mediocre at best and look where he is now: an established Hall of Famer who got by with his ring work rather than mic skills.
Frankly, people are just jumping on the bandwagon to bash these two amazing superstars for NO logical reason, such as when they jumped on the "Hate Cena" bandwagon for no reason. What's even more pathetic is the fact that Cena has an amazing work ethic, puts over younger talent, and obviously has passion for working in the WWE, and people hate the guy regardless.
You all hate Cena, even though he has phenomenal mic work, but a limited moveset? And you all hate Morrison and Bourne because they've no mic skills but even though they've top-notch ring-ability? Then again, I've seen criticisms of them just because they're faces, and all faces suck, right?
I'm wanting someone to give me a decent opinion, or perhaps find someone who agrees with me on this. I honestly think that Morrison and Bourne (along with Bryan, Jackson, and other mid-carders) will soon be carrying the company years to come, but that's my opinion based on how far they've come and the crowd reaction. The fact that people go around saying "morrison sucks he should never be champion cuz he'll never improve no matter what he tries..." is just blatant and harsh.
I just want to know why mic work is much more praised than ring-ability. I thought just being good in the ring would be enough to elevate you, seeing as how some superstars have acheived gold and fame that way.
*If you're going to bash and waste time with non-sensical answers, then don't even try.*
Morrison and Bourne are still young. People need to learn to give them time to improve; practicing on their mic skills, getting into a strong feud...etc.
Any opinions on this?