|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on Dec 16, 2015 13:51:55 GMT -5
It's almost as if the booker started...*gasp* highlighting the strengths of a worker instead of putting a spotlight on all their weaknesses!!!
Dave Metlzer brought this up and I think it's hilarious. They are essentially booking dude like Austin now. ...Really? It took you goofballs THIS LONG to figure out that maybe you should draw inspiration from another one of your big stars instead of just trying to create the next John Cena?
|
|
The Yes Man
Unicron
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 2,502
|
Post by The Yes Man on Dec 16, 2015 13:53:50 GMT -5
I've been ready for Roman as champion ever since he won the number one contender match and went face to face with Seth. I'm still pissed we didn't get that match too.
|
|
|
Post by karoline94 on Dec 16, 2015 13:55:42 GMT -5
If someone is not cheered after punching heel Macmahon in the face, they deserve to get fired.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 16, 2015 14:34:39 GMT -5
Like, it's nice and all, but it doesn't make sense. Why was Roman suddenly, and randomly, ridiculously over as f*** in Philly? Because he was booked correctly. It makes perfect sense.
|
|
|
Post by ARI WOW WOW on Dec 16, 2015 14:40:29 GMT -5
May be because he was facing Sheamus for the title and not Brock Lesnar. (And also because Daniel Bryan didn't "enter at No. 10" this time.)
|
|
chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 84,962
Member is Online
|
Post by chrom on Dec 16, 2015 14:43:38 GMT -5
Because he was made out to be the badass we all know he should be instead of delivering bad corny jokes ala Cena.
Just have him run roughshod over anyone that gets in his way like Goldberg, Goldberg except for Who's Next didn't need to say anything when he was out there.
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Dec 16, 2015 15:08:18 GMT -5
I think his overness us still questionable. I watched the Hulu raw after hearing good things. And his kick in the dick was crickets in the crowd. I think he's ryback over. He has good crowd popping moves. But the other aspects of his character need work. But people want reasons to cheer.
|
|
|
Post by Urfarkendarf on Dec 16, 2015 15:59:47 GMT -5
Like, it's nice and all, but it doesn't make sense. Why was Roman suddenly, and randomly, ridiculously over as f*** in Philly? Because he was booked as a badass and he beat the crap out of HHH/the boss the night before, which everyone loves to see. When they have him saying stupid shit like suffering succotash and the other nonsense he's had promo-wise and then chumped out in matches that do nothing for him, its easy to shit on him and rightfully so. It also helped him that Sheamus' booking during his short run was very shallow and I don't think anyone was happy with him as champ. Roman is not talented enough to get just "anything" over yet. He has to be booked correctly to connect with the majority of the audience. Once he gets more experience and he is more versatile than it will be easier to book him differently, but right now the line between being booked bad or great is thin. Roman's big test will be how he's booked against someone who the crowd respects/likes.
|
|
Perd
Patti Mayonnaise
Leslie needs to butt out for fear of receiving The Bunghole Buster
Posts: 32,001
Member is Online
|
Post by Perd on Dec 16, 2015 16:12:13 GMT -5
I do agree that it's a bit astonishing how quickly it all happened. It was just a day earlier that the crowd was crapping all over a pretty good match. Good booking does explain a lot of it. But man, completely reversing fortune like that is something that, quite frankly, I didn't think WWE was still capable of.
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,963
|
Post by H-Virus on Dec 16, 2015 18:46:14 GMT -5
I want to say it's because outside of "Happy Birthday, babygurl," and "lolprunes!", he didn't really talk that much.
A Roman Reigns who doesn't make noises with his mouth is a Roman Reigns that I can cheer for.
Which of course means that if he kicks off Raw next Monday with a ten minute monologue, I'll have to go back to hating him again.
|
|
RBD
Team Rocket
Posts: 765
|
Post by RBD on Dec 16, 2015 19:14:42 GMT -5
Improved booking + title change.
I think we need to give it a couple of weeks to judge how over he actually is, but I can't fault WWE for booking him in a sensible manner and having something of note actually happen on Raw. We'll see if it lasts more than a week.
He was not over with the Takeover crowd, if that tells us anything.
|
|
|
Post by EoE: Well There's Your Problem on Dec 16, 2015 19:25:32 GMT -5
What's funny, but kind of sad just the same, is that WWE, instead of running plays with Reigns that are straight out of 2006 (Cena), they're running plays with Reigns that are straight out of 1998 (Austin). The problem to me is what kind of heroic character archetypes can they do with Reigns that would suit his strengths, yet be completely unique to him and haven't already been done in wrestling? He's not suited as a "whitemeat babyface" like a Hogan or Cena, nor a quickfire trash talker like Rock or Punk. He's definitely not a scrappy underdog like Mysterio or Bryan. I don't think he could work as a raving lunatic like Savage or Warrior either. So that basically leaves your no-nonsense badass role... Which definitely suits his strengths, but are not unique in wrestling history at all (see Austin or Goldberg). All they can really do from here is try that, but add Reigns's own quirks and foibles to it to make it as much his own as they can.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 16, 2015 21:03:09 GMT -5
The problem to me is what kind of heroic character archetypes can they do with Reigns that would suit his strengths, yet be completely unique to him and haven't already been done in wrestling? He's not suited as a "whitemeat babyface" like a Hogan or Cena, nor a quickfire trash talker like Rock or Punk. He's definitely not a scrappy underdog like Mysterio or Bryan. I don't think he could work as a raving lunatic like Savage or Warrior either. So that basically leaves your no-nonsense badass role... Which definitely suits his strengths, but are not unique in wrestling history at all (see Austin or Goldberg). All they can really do from here is try that, but add Reigns's own quirks and foibles to it to make it as much his own as they can. Austin worked as a badass because he wasn't just 'a badass'. He had the rebellious redneck, blue collar, working man thing going for him as much as that came out because he was against corporate maniac Mr. McMahon. Austin could be a badass because McMahon kept putting hurdles in front of Austin for Austin to overcome. And sometimes Austin failed. Austin didn't look weak per se, rather, he looked vulnerable. Same with Mr. McMahon, he would get his licks in, often even coming out on top, but only for a moment, before Austin embarrassed him completely. Goldberg was more of a character whose features were 'just a badass', but it was easy to sidestep that because WCW could feed him the whole roster to get over, but he also should have been the guy to kill the NWO monster once and for all. It wasn't just that he beat the NWO, as Sting, Luger, and Piper before him also could beat the NWO. But Goldberg beat them so resoundingly. Yeah, WCW messed it up in a big way, sure, but for a moment Goldberg's 'just a badass' was also 'the guy who finally broke the NWO on behalf of WCW'. Whether or not WWE is trying to do the evil boss thing again but with Reigns in the anti-Authority role... I mean, if Vince McMahon is appearing on TV again to make Reigns look good, I see the upside, as it worked before. The downside is that fans have seen that story. Yeah, Reigns gets to look badass, but like I said, reheating something that's almost 20 years old isn't going to work come May when the product slows down. Even if Triple H is in the McMahon role and is embarrassed as much as McMahon was, it's different, but only superficially so. Reigns gets to look good, but are fans excited about another evil boss character who eats up TV time, which is something we've seen as long as Mr. McMahon has been a thing. On the flipside, WWE doesn't have the roster depth to feed Reigns guys so that he can look good in squash matches, as Goldberg really didn't have antagonists per se who created a natural conflict with him because of their differences. Reigns does with Bray Wyatt, but that's a match we've seen a bunch of times already in various permutations as single and tag matches. There's Brock Lesnar, maybe, but Lesnar's not around enough to make another Reigns/Lesnar feud meaningful (and the build for the last feud sucked, even though the match itself was alright). There's Triple H, but again, the evil boss thing is played out. There aren't any strong heels on the roster, except maybe Kevin Owens?, who could believably be slotted to feud with Reigns and also get interesting TV out of it. Del Rio? Good wrestler, balh character, okay matches. Sheamus? See Del Rio. Wade Barrett? Should be higher on the card but he'll likely never get there. Maybe Rusev, but he'll become a monster of the month deal. Unless Ambrose turns heel, but I don't think fans really want that. And then there's Rollins once he's back from injury, but the Shield guys at the top of the card is overexposed, or, risks being overexposed. That leaves Cena, but I doubt they'd turn him heel for Reigns (which could be interesting for both guys). So we'll get our predictable torch-passing moment and fans will likely crap on it because smarks or same old shit or whatever. Reigns and the WWE are two pieces of the puzzle that is WWE. Large pieces, no doubt, and even if Reigns as champion is as much rainbows and gumdrops as people want it to be and think it is right now, so much of the TV product, the storylines, and the booking will remain a desert. And that will negatively impact the former, no matter how hard Reigns works and how cool and badass he comes across. Well constructed, thoughtful post that didn't fall into the tired ol' "arguments" to support the conclusion of "I don't like Roman but it sounds petty to put it that way so I'll make it about ___ instead." You better articulated one point I've been thinking (and I'm generally a Roman fan, although I'm more a fan of put someone in the water and let's see if he can swim rather than trying to tear him apart before he gets a chance), which is: the whole Badass thing can't work for long without some variations because: 1) The roster is limited. You could do it with Lesnar because he wasn't around all the time, but Reigns can't go through the entire heel roster in three months because it doesn't leave him anything to work with. If he's Billy Badass-ing everyone, how do you make anyone care about matches as he's beating everybody up already. Which brings us to ... 2) The Badass thing is a double-edged sword. The same people advocating for it are likely going to be the ones who turn on it with the "they're making him look like Superman" complaints -- how can he be a badass and not look like Superman? Someone please tell me how they're supposed to walk that line. If "making him look like Superman" is a bad thing and "making him a complete badass" is a good thing, how are those different? So the idea is that Roman is a sheet-kicker who doesn't take any sheet off anyone ... yet they have to find a way to make him vulnerable enough that there's a reason to watch his big matches on the PPV-type shows. Not as easy as it sounds.
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Dec 16, 2015 21:07:31 GMT -5
What's funny, but kind of sad just the same, is that WWE, instead of running plays with Reigns that are straight out of 2006 (Cena), they're running plays with Reigns that are straight out of 1998 (Austin). The problem to me is what kind of heroic character archetypes can they do with Reigns that would suit his strengths, yet be completely unique to him and haven't already been done in wrestling? He's not suited as a "whitemeat babyface" like a Hogan or Cena, nor a quickfire trash talker like Rock or Punk. He's definitely not a scrappy underdog like Mysterio or Bryan. I don't think he could work as a raving lunatic like Savage or Warrior either. So that basically leaves your no-nonsense badass role... Which definitely suits his strengths, but are not unique in wrestling history at all (see Austin or Goldberg). All they can really do from here is try that, but add Reigns's own quirks and foibles to it to make it as much his own as they can. I've never been a fan of "They're booking ___ like ___" for exactly that reason. You can be as creative as you want, but there's only so many ways to push a guy.
|
|
|
Post by Super Duper Dragunov on Dec 16, 2015 23:08:30 GMT -5
Cause he became Stone Cold for a couple nights. Granted it was very smart booking to put the title on him and get it out of the way.
when in doubt rehash the same formula that brought you to stellar heights once upon a time.
Now if they keep him Stone Cold, and not a Rock/Cena wannabe, he'll be okay.
|
|
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 Dec 16, 2015 23:08:46 GMT -5
Good booking. Finally.
|
|
Urethra Franklin
King Koopa
When Toronto sports teams lose, Alison Brie is sad
Posts: 11,090
|
Post by Urethra Franklin on Dec 16, 2015 23:20:05 GMT -5
Roman Reigns got over by being a silent asskicker.
When he turned face, the WWE - as they do to all guys getting serious pushes in a top-tier face role - decided to make Roman a snarky cut-up. It didn't work because it was just so forced and Roman's not a great talker.
Then, they attempted to make him into a plucky underdog and almost a Daniel Bryan surrogate. Again, it made no sense and nobody bought it.
Finally, thanks to injuries and limited options among other reasons, somebody rediscovered why people liked Reigns in the first place and booked him to his strengths again and people responded in kind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2015 1:42:50 GMT -5
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Dec 17, 2015 1:57:16 GMT -5
They put some whacky Kool-Aid in the Philly crowd's beer.
|
|
|
Post by ManInGauze on Dec 17, 2015 5:27:59 GMT -5
Because the WWE can easily manipulate people.
|
|