Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 19:36:42 GMT -5
Batista's "major push" wasn't that much of a major push. They ended up sending him to SmackDown and ultimately chose Cena to be the guy. There is no B-Show where It can be "Roman Reigns and everyone else" anymore. Also Batista was a big hoss who wasn't expected to "wrestle" anyone. WWE just likes to pretend Reigns is a hoss. He should be held to a higher standard. WWE has never been a workrate oriented company; but those types of guys are the ones who are becoming rising stars. And even the guys who aren't known for workrate are stepping up and improving their in-ring game while Reigns only does his big spots Dude, Batista was getting booked as the biggest asskicker on the roster from like mid-late 2004 onward. He was winning matches by knockout with his clothesline and manhandling everyone from the lowliest jobber to former main eventers like Benoit. From the beginning of 05 until the Draft, Raw was basically The Batista and HHH Show. Also I've seen you make that comment time and again and it still makes no sense to me. WWE "pretends" Reigns is a hoss? He's a big guy with hard-hitting offense, and since his return he's been regularly doing power moves. That was pre-Cena megapush though. Fans are pretty hip to "you're not ready for this and WWE is trying to make me think you are" now. There's also been so many people the fans got behind that WWE killed off, which adds to the fans' hostility and cynicism in the event that WWE decides to "make a star". Sheamus knows all about this. Also, WWE is absolutely workrate oriented right now. You can't only be good in the ring and totally suck at everything else, but it's gotten to the point where you're counted on to have a great match if you want to main event. This shift started when CM Punk won the WWE title and raised the bar in terms of match quality at the main event level. Sheamus didn't get backlash because the fans were wise that WWE was trying to make him a star, he got backlash because he squashed Bryan at WrestleMania. If it had been Mark Henry or Del Rio or someone in Bryan's place, Sheamus would've been fine. He wouldn't have been a huge star or anything but he certainly would've been better off than he is now. And I'd argue that the workrate type guys generally became stars for reasons other than their workrate. Punk only really got over during his feud with Jeff Hardy in 09, and Bryan was putting on clinics basically as soon as he walked in the door, but crowds couldn't care less about him until he started the Yes chant. The Shield getting over had less to do with their workrate and more to do with the fact they were booked like total badasses for close to two straight years. I mean, Christ, Ryback was the legit number two face for a while. That should tell you how much the fans value workrate.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Jan 2, 2015 19:40:44 GMT -5
Batista's "major push" wasn't that much of a major push. They ended up sending him to SmackDown and ultimately chose Cena to be the guy. There is no B-Show where It can be "Roman Reigns and everyone else" anymore. Also Batista was a big hoss who wasn't expected to "wrestle" anyone. WWE just likes to pretend Reigns is a hoss. He should be held to a higher standard. WWE has never been a workrate oriented company; but those types of guys are the ones who are becoming rising stars. And even the guys who aren't known for workrate are stepping up and improving their in-ring game while Reigns only does his big spots Dude, Batista was getting booked as the biggest asskicker on the roster from like mid-late 2004 onward. He was winning matches by knockout with his clothesline and manhandling everyone from the lowliest jobber to former main eventers like Benoit. From the beginning of 05 until the Draft, Raw was basically The Batista and HHH Show. Also I've seen you make that comment time and again and it still makes no sense to me. WWE "pretends" Reigns is a hoss? He's a big guy with hard-hitting offense, and since his return he's been regularly doing power moves. It means that WWE is trying to sell Reigns as being a "big man wrestler" when he's really the same size as John Cena and Randy Orton, who aren't presented as such.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 19:51:13 GMT -5
It means that WWE is trying to sell Reigns as being a "big man wrestler" when he's really the same size as John Cena and Randy Orton, who aren't presented as such. Reigns weighs more than either Cena or Orton and has two inches on Cena in height. Cena's also very much presented as a power wrestler - pretty much his entire moveset is power moves and feats of strength. He's not booked like Big Show, no, but neither is Reigns. Both are presented as agile strong guys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 19:57:13 GMT -5
Batista's "major push" wasn't that much of a major push. They ended up sending him to SmackDown and ultimately chose Cena to be the guy. There is no B-Show where It can be "Roman Reigns and everyone else" anymore. Also Batista was a big hoss who wasn't expected to "wrestle" anyone. WWE just likes to pretend Reigns is a hoss. He should be held to a higher standard. WWE has never been a workrate oriented company; but those types of guys are the ones who are becoming rising stars. And even the guys who aren't known for workrate are stepping up and improving their in-ring game while Reigns only does his big spots Dude, Batista was getting booked as the biggest asskicker on the roster from like mid-late 2004 onward. He was winning matches by knockout with his clothesline and manhandling everyone from the lowliest jobber to former main eventers like Benoit. From the beginning of 05 until the Draft, Raw was basically The Batista and HHH Show. Also I've seen you make that comment time and again and it still makes no sense to me. WWE "pretends" Reigns is a hoss? He's a big guy with hard-hitting offense, and since his return he's been regularly doing power moves. That was pre-Cena megapush though. Fans are pretty hip to "you're not ready for this and WWE is trying to make me think you are" now. There's also been so many people the fans got behind that WWE killed off, which adds to the fans' hostility and cynicism in the event that WWE decides to "make a star". Sheamus knows all about this. Also, WWE is absolutely workrate oriented right now. You can't only be good in the ring and totally suck at everything else, but it's gotten to the point where you're counted on to have a great match if you want to main event. This shift started when CM Punk won the WWE title and raised the bar in terms of match quality at the main event level. Sheamus didn't get backlash because the fans were wise that WWE was trying to make him a star, he got backlash because he squashed Bryan at WrestleMania. If it had been Mark Henry or Del Rio or someone in Bryan's place, Sheamus would've been fine. He wouldn't have been a huge star or anything but he certainly would've been better off than he is now. And I'd argue that the workrate type guys generally became stars for reasons other than their workrate. Punk only really got over during his feud with Jeff Hardy in 09, and Bryan was putting on clinics basically as soon as he walked in the door, but crowds couldn't care less about him until he started the Yes chant. The Shield getting over had less to do with their workrate and more to do with the fact they were booked like total badasses for close to two straight years. I mean, Christ, Ryback was the legit number two face for a while. That should tell you how much the fans value workrate. Ryback got buried hard in 2013. No one really cared. Daniel Bryan got buried, less so but just not pushed to the top like he deserved. Fans revolted and forced WWE to change their plans. Dolph Ziggler, arguably up until recently, was pretty shit as a character, as a promo guy, he was booked weak, there was absolutely no reason that guy should've still been over like he was. But, somehow, fans have always been behind him. It's because he's a f***ing great worker. CM Punk was able to cut a shoot promo, as a heel, bitching about how he should be higher on the card, despite the fact, at that point, the last year saw him losing constantly. Fans saw through that and realize the subtext: I'm the best performer on the roster, I should be on top. The result was CM Punk: MegaFace. Titus O'Neil... Huge guy, good look, tons of charisma, great on the mic. Why on earth is he not getting a push? He sucks in the ring. John Cena has been on top for 10 years. One would think he would've pared down his style a bit, take it easier in there, give the people what they want and rest on his laurels otherwise. He works harder in the ring than ever, expanding his repertoire in order to silence the haters. Workrate doesn't matter to everyone, but it matters to enough of the fanbase that it's become more important than ever. Everyone knows wrestling is fake now, so getting guys over by booking them as the coolest/toughest/best is harder to do. People go "so what, it's fake, they just chose him to be the best." And they see other guys who put on breathtaking matches, and they say "why isn't that guy written to the best? he's the best one to watch." People notice this stuff, hell it's the only thing keeping a lot of people watching. The last 3 years, the storyline quality has been low, while the match quality has gone way up. If you're watching WWE just for storylines, that's gotta be tough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 20:15:14 GMT -5
All good points, I hadn't even thought of Ziggler. I'll concede that workrate is perhaps more important to the crowd these days than I initially figured. I do think that not everyone at the top of the card needs to necessarily be an elite worker, though. In the days of Bret and Shawn, you had Diesel. The days of Eddie and Benoit as main eventers featured JBL. In our modern day of guys like Bryan and Rollins, who's to say there isn't room for someone like Reigns? It's not as though Reigns getting a big Mania moment this year means that Bryan or Rollins will never see the main event again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 20:21:31 GMT -5
All good points, I hadn't even thought of Ziggler. I'll concede that workrate is perhaps more important to the crowd these days than I initially figured. I do think that not everyone at the top of the card needs to necessarily be an elite worker, though. In the days of Bret and Shawn, you had Diesel. The days of Eddie and Benoit as main eventers featured JBL. In our modern day of guys like Bryan and Rollins, who's to say there isn't room for someone like Reigns? It's not as though Reigns getting a big Mania moment this year means that Bryan or Rollins will never see the main event again. I loved Diesel as a kid. Kevin Nash is one of my all time favorite personalities in wrestling. I actually liked his matches before he got extra beat up/lazy. Nash was really good on the psychology side too. Much like Undertaker. There's definitely room for big men who are really great at what they do, it doesn't all have to be 200 pound guys doing various dives and crazy spots. I'd prefer that is not the case. The big thing to me is that being great in the ring is something WWE's sucky, character-undermining writing can't mess with. Unless they decide to job you out like crazy to make a point, like they did with Cesaro. They want people to get over for other reasons, but they can't because WWE's presentation holds people back, along with kayfabe being even deader than it used to be.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jan 2, 2015 20:55:21 GMT -5
Why should the crowd cheer for Lesnar? I mean really? I get the Cena hate and all but even a smark crowd should have trouble cheering for a goof who has walked off with a belt and defended it once in the span of 4-5 months. That's the problem with the whole Lesnar run. He comes off like a coward who refuses to fight, rather than the unstoppable destroyer he outta be for the angle to work. He needed to at least destroy some schmuck every month on PPV to justify putting the title on him. If he refuses to do that, why put the belt on him? For me it's just cuz Lesnar is awesome. I'm a Lesnar guy. He's been in my top five all time favorites for over a decade. That's why I do/would cheer him.
|
|