Earlier quoted context omitted.
Selling puts is a volatility bet mostly, but can be seen as bullish like buying stock, but doesn’t just behave as up=good, so your understanding is not up to par yet for this example. This is literally the issue.
How is that the issue? Even then, if someone’s position is „this stock is going up“, betting on „this stock is going down“ is the opposite. How you’re doing that is an implementation detail. You can even go to a Bookie and make a bet about the stock if you want to, the point is inverting the prediction. The issue is whether there’s a clear inverse, which I would argue there is.
You can invert specific positions with specific timings, you cannot invert statements from a show because implementation details as you call them will be paramount to performance. There's plenty of "reverse" ETFs that last a long time and aren't meme money grabs that do just that. The problem is in the interpretation of what "opposite cramer" means. If Cramer says something goes up, but it stays flat, going short will also lose money, selling PUTs as I described would make money - which strategy is "the opposite" of what he said? Both are other things that can happen that aren't what he said. And there's way more things that can happen.