You mean before he got a title push?
No, I mean during the title push and while he held the title. Up until a few weeks before Mania, Mark Henry was THE heel, and Bryan was in a supporting Ziggler role. He didn't take off until after the WM debacle.
Sheamus was getting "what?" chants not too long ago.
So has Bryan, and Punk, and Vickie, and Cena, and Vince. What is your point?
The thing is that a smark moment happened at Mania where the crowd repudiated a WWE created fukk up. That moment happened nine months ago. But since the IWC doesn't get many moments of that magnitude you all aren't content to just let it be. Now you have spun a legitimate moment into a myth.
The way the IWC tells it, Daniel Bryan is a massively over guy who can be put into any situation and make shyt into sugar and it's always been that way. He came into WM as a MASSIVELY POPULAR champion and Sheamus was getting X-Pac heat.
The reality is that five to six months prior to Mania, Bryan was getting reactions that Tyler Reks would
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e16ec/e16ec5ac577a3d5c4d3ba572d010069a85ea0220" alt="heh :heh: :heh:"
at. Two months before Mania he was getting mild but inconsistent heat comparable to what Dolph Ziggler is getting now. After the mindbogglingly stupid booking of the WM match, the already catchy YES thing took off in an open rebellion against WWE stupidity. Sheamus got booed (but not out of the building and the Brogue Kick heard round the world even got a big pop, it was after it was over the crowd realized they got fukked over) in the aftermath but all of that peaked within a few weeks. Unconfirmed reports of sign tampering and sound editing were taken as gospel, despite the fact that a YES shirt went on sale the next week and the same dirt sheets reported the WWE was planting YES signs for crowd use.
Bryan reached new heights yes, I take nothing away from him. He ate that burial like a Scooby Snack. And that's amazing. That's a great moment. So why taint it with exaggeration? And why omit key facts? The main one being that Sheamus became a face in the first place because he was also getting cheered as a heel. They then took what got him cheered, tossed it in the
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ffe36/ffe36df555f353d179d7e21500b3d1b36ce1db41" alt="trash :trash: :trash:"
and gave us the Sheamus we see today.
Bryan on the other hand is pretty much a face now and his character change has been minimal. He's still the same eccentric, geeky, a$$hole YES/NO screaming b*stard that got over huge post WM. This ridiculous tag team with Kane allowed them to exaggerate those traits the crowd loves and made the transition to a face much easier. So yeah, he's gotten "half the push," but that half has been written and plotted better than Sheamus' whole.
For Sheamus to be over at all is amazing and the fact that he's so over that you all still try to downplay it months later is downright hilarious. Bryan's character was tweaked for success, Sheamus' was tweaked for failure. So, instead of saying, "Imagine how over Bryan would be if he got Sheamus' push," we should instead be asking, "How much MORE over would Sheamus be if he not only got to keep the character traits that forced his face turn, but had them expanded upon?"