>>9503051Thank you for asking that question and I’ll elaborate what smark means to me, and why I used it in this context. To me, smark just means anything that the dirtsheet fans are all about. If they think Hulk Hogan was the shits, that’s a smark opinion. If they think CM Punk is a locker room cancer, that’s a smark opinion. If they think star ratings matter, that’s a smark opinion. So in this circumstance, I thought everything that the funhouse match represented was just smarky bullshit to pop internet fans that Wyatt probably gets most of his feedback from.
The Cena is Hogan shit doesn’t make any sense, and the only way I could see it making sense is if you’re someone on a message board who hated Cena for not putting over guys like Kenny Dykstra. But even then, Cena was never the politician Hogan was, so to call him peak politicking Hogan makes no sense. Or as I mentioned the Wrestlemania 30 match. Every internet opinion that I’ve seen says the Wyatt should’ve beat John, but when I watched the match, it was just the classic story of John overcoming the odds and sticking true to himself. In storyline, John beat him fair. In a booking mindset, the Wyatt Family remained strong because their influence on John almost worked and they’re still powerful, and John stays strong cause he got the pin. Only the internet smarks were mad because they see the win loss column and not the actual story told in the match. I’m sure there was other shit but that’s all I can remember at the moment.
To say this was a mental breakdown for Cena and that The Fiend got in his head and made John feel bad for all his wrongdoings doesn’t make sense and makes me irritated. John didn’t do anything wrong, and everything that Wyatt was trying to make John feel bad about was just moronic internet speak. And guess what? When John returned, he was the same old John as before, meaning that the match didn’t mean shit.
Please ask more questions if you have any
