|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Jul 3, 2014 17:36:05 GMT -5
I mean...I don't know. By all means, Reigns SHOULD be a star when this is all said and done. He's pretty hot right now, limited moveset and all, and has been hot for months now. That said, WWE has to be careful here. They have a real nasty tendency of going way too hard with someone and just deciding that they are gonna put them over everyone ever while ignoring a lot of the key elments that got the character over in the first place. If we get shit like Roman destroying Rollins and Ambrose for months on end, I can see fans turning on him just like they did with Cena when he was tearing through Angle and Jericho.
|
|
|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on Jul 3, 2014 17:43:47 GMT -5
WWE will never EVER learn. Fans can sniff from a mile away when someone is being groomed and pushed for the top spot. They LOVE underdogs. The moment they sense somebody is 'The Chosen One' they lose the underdog part of their character. Ambrose is hot, a) because he's incredibly talented but also b) because he's a credible underdog, fans know that the WWE powers-that-be decided Reigns was the man and Ambrose wasn't. Reigns I think will still succeed, crucially because he's NOT JOHN CENA. He's a fresh face and brings variety to a tired Main Event scene that saw the Main Event of Survivor Series 2013 be RANDY ORTON vs THE BIG SHOW. Yes, in 2013 a major PPV was headlined by Randy Orton vs The Big Show. What he will never have is the crowd adoration that Bryan/Punk/Foley/Austin could garner from the fans knowing deep down that they were never meant to be in a Main Event spot. I pretty much agree with this. I do think there's a tendency amongst the fanbase to resent a guy who is pushed to be THE GUY when it's done in such an obvious manner that everybody knows it's not organic.
|
|
|
Post by Surfer Sandman on Jul 3, 2014 18:14:18 GMT -5
I would find it much, much, much more impressive if an underdog Ambrose were the one to topple Brock Lesnar, should Brock actually, you know, win the title.
My first choice is obviously D-Bry but it's just too risky to put him up against Brock.
Perhaps Ambrose starts a feud with Brock where Brock makes Ambrose's life a living hell until he finally snaps and starts cutting promos similar to Austin-Pillman. Basically, to win, Ambrose has to be the one to get inside of Brock's head to where Brock can't focus.
Sorry to hijack this thread. I do not see much in Mr.Reigns, other than an U.S title run.
|
|
|
Post by cool guy on Jul 3, 2014 18:21:44 GMT -5
I would find it much, much, much more impressive if an underdog Ambrose were the one to topple Brock Lesnar, should Brock actually, you know, win the title. See, I think the build to a Lesnar/Ambrose match would be wonderful, but I'm worried the match itself will just be an inferior version of Lesnar/Punk.
|
|
|
Post by Surfer Sandman on Jul 3, 2014 18:26:51 GMT -5
I would find it much, much, much more impressive if an underdog Ambrose were the one to topple Brock Lesnar, should Brock actually, you know, win the title. See, I think the build to a Lesnar/Ambrose match would be wonderful, but I'm worried the match itself will just be an inferior version of Lesnar/Punk. How so? Ambrose has always been the type that is one breakdown away from a total snap. CM Punk was not booked in that manner. Though, if you must, book Ambrose-Rollins in that manner instead. They have more in common with Austin-Pillman (former tag partners, held lesser titles) and you can play off of that established chemistry. There are so many possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by cool guy on Jul 3, 2014 18:34:57 GMT -5
See, I think the build to a Lesnar/Ambrose match would be wonderful, but I'm worried the match itself will just be an inferior version of Lesnar/Punk. How so? Ambrose has always been the type that is one breakdown away from a total snap. CM Punk was not booked in that manner. Though, if you must, book Ambrose-Rollins in that manner instead. They have more in common with Austin-Pillman (former tag partners, held lesser titles) and you can play off of that established chemistry. There are so many possibilities. I guess I just mean that Ambrose and Punk are both guys who lack a lot of hard-hitting offense, so it's hard for them to believably hurt Lesnar. Punk somehow managed to make it work, but Punk is better in the ring than Ambrose. But then again, Ambrose has a lot of deathmatch experience from CZW, so if the match goes full hardcore we might have something special. Just speculating, obviously.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Jul 3, 2014 18:59:34 GMT -5
If you read the entire dirtsheet "report" taht this was based on ... it started off with "all plans for Daniel Bryan are off right now" or on hold or something like that -- in other words, this could change if and when he makes a successful recovery and gets back to being the DB we all know.
But should WWE not make plans in case he doesn't come back, in case he needs another surgery and is off for a year (or nine months or 18 months or whatever)? In case he just isn't able to do what he was able to do before? In case he's away a long time and the fans don't embrace him in the same way when he does return?
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Jul 3, 2014 19:01:35 GMT -5
I get what you're saying with "hard hitting" and "believable", and I know that's been WWE (and to a large extent pro wrestling's) mantra for many years, I just hate it. I look at a guy like Bruce Lee who was 140 pounds maybe but none of us would doubt how legitimate of a badass he was. I see The Gracies, none of whom are huge, and again I'd rather have most of them watching my back than some gym rat.
The differentiation with wrestling, of course, is that it's a work, but the beauty is that there are no hard and fast rules to "who is believable". You take Ambrose, you push that he's not just unhinged but legitimately insane, you mention his past in death matches, and suddenly he's a guy who, in kayfabe, will, just like Foley, kill himself to make you suffer.
Rollins was the high flyer in the group, but again if you present him right, he can be as legitimate as anyone.
Reigns, he has that look, he has the pedigree, he has an athletic background. He also has the "big spots". What he needs is the filler to make him complete. If he was fifty pounds lighter, people would call him a spot monkey, because what he has at this point are signature moves and not much else. He hasn't needed more than that because, as the "hot tag", he was a clean house and wreck shit badass.
In MMA parlance, he's the guy with a knockout punch but nothing to go with it. That's my fear for him, that he will be a "spot-spot-ROWAARRR-finish-pin" guy when he has the talent to be far more. Or, if you insist on him just being the "big move" guy, then he needs to be a tag guy, because that's where they thrive.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jul 3, 2014 22:37:10 GMT -5
WWE will never EVER learn. Fans can sniff from a mile away when someone is being groomed and pushed for the top spot. They LOVE underdogs. The moment they sense somebody is 'The Chosen One' they lose the underdog part of their character. Ambrose is hot, a) because he's incredibly talented but also b) because he's a credible underdog, fans know that the WWE powers-that-be decided Reigns was the man and Ambrose wasn't. Reigns I think will still succeed, crucially because he's NOT JOHN CENA. He's a fresh face and brings variety to a tired Main Event scene that saw the Main Event of Survivor Series 2013 be RANDY ORTON vs THE BIG SHOW. Yes, in 2013 a major PPV was headlined by Randy Orton vs The Big Show. What he will never have is the crowd adoration that Bryan/Punk/Foley/Austin could garner from the fans knowing deep down that they were never meant to be in a Main Event spot. Hit the nail on the head. Reigns superpush is going to be met with floods of Ambrose chants, you can pretty much guarantee it. When the Shield broke up, Ambrose got most of their fans in the divorce, but WWE is going to try and force giving custody to Reigns. It isn't going to work.
|
|
|
Post by Widow's Peak on Jul 3, 2014 22:39:30 GMT -5
The funniest thing about the Reigns backlash is that it is mostly based off of things that haven't happened yet. It's kind of like the smark version of the pre-crime unit from Minority Report. Anyway, the guy's over now, so why not have a long-term plan for him. If it doesn't work and someone else gets red hot instead, so be it. That doesn't mean that WWE shouldn't try to get the audience to care about a guy they see a lot of potential in. It seems to be working so far.
|
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Jul 3, 2014 23:10:41 GMT -5
The funniest thing about the Reigns backlash is that it is mostly based off of things that haven't happened yet. It's kind of like the smark version of the pre-crime unit from Minority Report. Anyway, the guy's over now, so why not have a long-term plan for him. If it doesn't work and someone else gets red hot instead, so be it. That doesn't mean that WWE shouldn't try to get the audience to care about a guy they see a lot of potential in. It seems to be working so far. I haven't told anyone about the psychics in the pool.
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Jul 4, 2014 13:34:56 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the Reigns pushed hasn't happened. It's been started a while. Remember Survivor Series and Royal Rumble?
|
|
|
Post by abjordans on Jul 4, 2014 14:04:05 GMT -5
This countdown to the Reigns backlash is pretty pessimistic and a little too smark-y for my tastes. I mean, the guy is pretty damn over. I feel like the only backlash is on this board.
|
|
Chip
Hank Scorpio
Slam Jam Death.
Posts: 5,185
|
Post by Chip on Jul 4, 2014 14:06:19 GMT -5
It's weirdly comforting logging on and having stereotypically "IWC" things to discuss. I'm looking forward to the thread that asks "Reigns is a dick, how is he supposed to be a face?"
|
|
FAR5222
El Dandy
Counted 237 Bros. SWERVE Got no cookie for it.
Posts: 7,889
|
Post by FAR5222 on Jul 4, 2014 14:07:57 GMT -5
This countdown to the Reigns backlash is pretty pessimistic and a little too smark-y for my tastes. I mean, the guy is pretty damn over. I feel like the only backlash is on this board. Google search it. Its not only this board. Everyone is having this same discussion.
|
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Jul 4, 2014 14:09:35 GMT -5
I'll wait until it happens to say 'Duh,' assuming it happens.
|
|
|
Post by Neo: "The One" who CLAPS on Jul 4, 2014 14:11:17 GMT -5
Roman Reigns is awesome. 2012 Ryback was awesome. Sometimes WWE knows what they're doing, and sometimes the internet needs to get their heads out of their asses and realize that you don't need mic skills or an elaborate moveset to have charisma or to have "it." Everyone is just paranoid that poor little Dean Ambrose might get lost in the shuffle and so they're taking it out on Leakee. I believe in Roman Reigns, but I also believe in Ambrose and Rollins as well; it's not like only one of them can succeed in the longterm. The same people in January who were excited at the thought of Reigns being a main eventer are now crapping on the idea. Reigns is over. The crowd isn't already turning on him either, and despite one bad comedy sketch, his character hasn't changed all that much either. I know "wait and see" never works with the WWE, but how about we enjoy the ride and see where we are headed.
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Dave on Jul 4, 2014 14:16:40 GMT -5
I'd like to point out I still think Ryback is better than Roman Reigns. So I don't appreciate all the smark generalization fellow smarks
|
|
FAR5222
El Dandy
Counted 237 Bros. SWERVE Got no cookie for it.
Posts: 7,889
|
Post by FAR5222 on Jul 4, 2014 14:22:58 GMT -5
I'd like to point out I still think Ryback is better than Roman Reigns. So I don't appreciate all the smark generalization fellow smarks If only Ryback won that battle royal a few weeks ago. I was cheering for him badly.
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Jul 4, 2014 21:22:46 GMT -5
that's what always drives me crazy. I've never been interested in interactive stories. I may not like the story someone tells but to me it's there job to tell it to me. I didn't even like choose your own adventure books as a kid. Dude without interactive crowds, we would have gotten Dave Batista in the main event and Rocky Maivia would have been out a job quicker than you can say Marty Jannetty. Interaction helps things, if crowds weren't interactive and they didn't mean anything, we'd all be watching WCW on Mondays. Without interactivity, we'd be all complaining how shitty WrestleMania 30 was when Batista won the title from Orton and celebrated to a nuclear chorus of boos to close out the show.
|
|