If WWE.com Was Being Honest: 5 Articles That Deserve New Titles

3. Orton And Cena: Best. Thing. Ever.

What the article is called: "An Explosive New Chapter Gets Written In One of WWE’s Greatest Rivalry"

What it should be called: "We’ll Keep Telling You This Feud Is The Austin Vs Rock Of This Generation Until You Believe It"

Nothing says big rivalry quite like a slideshow...that features a bland SmackDown match. WWE.com posted a whopping 20 photos of Cena and Orton going at it on the main event of their Tuesday night show. Two probably would have sufficed.

This match was initially teased as the WrestleMania main event after Orton won the Royal Rumble, but then the company threw it out on TV seemingly in the attempt to get fans to stop worrying that it would actually happen at Mania. Still, they wanted to make it seem like you were watching something historic.

WWE can play those two up as this generation’s Rock/Austin, Steamboat/Flair or Hart/Michaels all they want, but it’s just not true. They're solid wrestlers, but they seem to need opponents that are better than them in the ring to deliver classic matches. They also somehow never developed any real chemistry that translated into drawing money. Sometimes that happens. Undertaker and Giant Gonzalez were the same way.

Part of the problem is that we've seen them fight too many damn times to care anymore! Not counting Royal Rumble matches, Cena and Orton have faced off in various forms (singles, tags, multi-man matches) an astronomical 73 times on television! If they wrestled on average once a week on TV, that’s well over a year of their career devoted to fighting each other in some fashion. It’s insanity, and that overexposure is largely why fans feel so apathetic towards them ever locking up again.

Sorry WWE, due to the lackluster reaction to those two on SmackDown, fans aren’t buying this as an actual historic rivalry. It's more Rock vs. Billy Gunn than Rock vs. Austin.