|
Post by 2coldMack is even more baffled on Oct 30, 2015 22:48:21 GMT -5
The people who say it's Dean without question are fans of the guys or/and haters of the other. Yes there is "question" because Reigns improved a lot and Dean not so much even if he was the better man when they debuted. 2 years ago, yes Dean. 1 year ago...Dean. Now? Hard to say. I would be more excited to see matches between Reigns and Cesaro, Rusev or Owens for exemple. So to me it's Roman. Nah, still Dean, no question. He can actually tell a story in the match, instead of running through the same three or four spots while the announcers wet their pants over him.
|
|
|
Post by The Beast Disincarnate on Oct 30, 2015 22:55:07 GMT -5
The people who say it's Dean without question are fans of the guys or/and haters of the other. Yes there is "question" because Reigns improved a lot and Dean not so much even if he was the better man when they debuted. 2 years ago, yes Dean. 1 year ago...Dean. Now? Hard to say. I would be more excited to see matches between Reigns and Cesaro, Rusev or Owens for exemple. So to me it's Roman. Nah, still Dean, no question. He can actually tell a story in the match, instead of running through the same three or four spots while the announcers wet their pants over him. Making weird faces doesn't equal telling a story in a ring But i won't try to convince an Ambrose Fan/Reigns hater
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Oct 31, 2015 2:24:34 GMT -5
It really depends on the type of match. Their styles are so different, I wouldn't say one is objectively better than the other.
|
|
|
Post by theshockmaster on Oct 31, 2015 4:39:56 GMT -5
In general I would say Ambrose is the guy who could have a good match with just about anyone, and Reigns needs the right opponent.
Then again, Reigns had a damn good match with Big Show so what do I know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2015 8:44:39 GMT -5
The people who say it's Dean without question are fans of the guys or/and haters of the other. Yes there is "question" because Reigns improved a lot and Dean not so much even if he was the better man when they debuted. 2 years ago, yes Dean. 1 year ago...Dean. Now? Hard to say. I would be more excited to see matches between Reigns and Cesaro, Rusev or Owens for exemple. So to me it's Roman. Nah, still Dean, no question. He can actually tell a story in the match, instead of running through the same three or four spots while the announcers wet their pants over him. I don't know if you actually watch (not trying to be a dick, but so many people talk about this stuff who don't actually watch [at least they say they don't]), but Reigns has definitely expanded his moveset, like a lot. And, he can throw some wicked punches and is a good brawler as well. I think a lot of the stock criticisms about the guy are starting to evaporate.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Oct 31, 2015 13:47:14 GMT -5
Still the main thing Reigns brings to the table is Explosiveness.
I am bored silly by Explosive wrestlers. Reigns has nothing for me. So Ambrose by a mile.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2015 14:04:32 GMT -5
Ambrose is the same guy he always was. A good talker, a good character who isn't that good in the ring. He just never feels like he's in a fight to me. I always feel like I'm watching an act and his moveset is such that you can always see the next story beat coming from a mile away.
Both guys have a tendency to do things they think look cool in a match but make no sense from a story perspective. I've seen too many times where Dean's gone and hit a dive on the outside, then IMMEDIATELY had a heel launch him into the stairs or something to cut him off. The dive means nothing. Roman does the same sort of thing, see his rollup counter on Bray inside Hell in a Cell. Why are you trying to win one of the biggest, ugliest blood feuds of your career against a guy you hate with a rollup? What would that prove? Bleh.
In the end I like Roman more because I feel like Roman's in a fight more often. Dean's too cutesy for his own good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2015 14:12:56 GMT -5
Does Dean wrestle? I thought he was just a guy that hung around the locker room giving Roman pep talks and massaging his shoulders.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2015 18:04:47 GMT -5
In a corollary to what I said earlier in the thread, there's no doubt to me that Dean Ambrose is a better "worker", in the sense of knowing what he's doing and being able to lead a match and all that jazz.
My saying Reigns is better in the ring right now is purely based on match quality, specifically in how he works the WWE style.
Take both guys out of the WWE and put them on an indie card with less experienced people, Ambrose's match will be so much better. But that's not the scenario they're in at this time.
|
|
keezy
Dennis Stamp
full time slacker
Posts: 4,621
|
Post by keezy on Oct 31, 2015 18:10:32 GMT -5
I feel like Ambrose has been more limited since turning babyface.
Cross body, dropkick in the ropes, punch flurry, rope clothesline (attempt 10 times in a match), dirty deeds.
His only good matches seem to be gimmick matches, I do hope that changes though.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,121
|
Post by Mozenrath on Oct 31, 2015 18:12:19 GMT -5
Dean's the overall better performer to me, but I like Roman's moves more.
|
|