Dean Ambrose is getting the WrestleMania moment isn't he?

[MAD TITAN]

Jan 27, 2016 0:01:06 GMT -5 MGH said:

He has been more over than Roman for two years now. It just doesn't matter to them. They chose their guy.

*See CM Punk, WrestleMania 29

[Dean-o]

Jan 27, 2016 1:52:10 GMT -5 Pooh Carlson said:

The fans were able to manipulate the bookers one year and now they think they're entitled to be able to do that every year. Well they're not. It's actually a decent story that's being told, it'll be a good match, and the rest of the Mania card is gonna be rock solid full of talent. So just shut up everybody and enjoy the show.

For a company that loves to brag how they "listen & give the fans what they want", you make it sound like the WWE Universe had a hell of a nerve letting the WWE know they hated the direction Daniel Bryan was taking leading up to WrestleMania XXX.

[Deleted]

And another thing, it's so easy to switch Ambrose in place of Reigns in this story. This is everything that's happened to Ambrose since Shield broke up.

SPOILER: Click to show

{Spoiler}{Spoiler}- Rollins breaks up the Shield and joins the Authority
- Ambrose feuds with Rollins for betraying them and joining the Authority
- Ambrose was screwed out of the MITB by the Authority
- At Battleground Triple H ejects Ambrose from the arena for fighting with Rollins
- Ambrose loses Summerslam match against Rollins due to the Authority
- Rollins slams Ambrose's head through cinder blocks with help from Kane
- Ambrose returns 1 month later and attacks Rollins during Night of Champions
- Ambroses loses HIAC against Rollins due to Wyatt
- Ambrose loses Wyatt feud
- Next night after the Wyatt feud Ambrose teams with Reigns to face Rollins and Kane or Big Show ( forgot who)
- Ambrose beats Barrett one night on Raw
- Ambrose is eliminated by the Authority during the Rumble
- Ambrose demands a match with Barrett for his belt based on his previous win, is DQ'd at FastLane and doesn't win at WM
- Ambrose beats Harper during Extreme Rules for what happened at WM and this is his first single's ppv victory since Shield broke up
- Ambrose is screwed in the KOTR tournament when Ziggler attacked Sheamus
- Ambrose beats Rollins clean to be entered in the Payback Fatal-4-Way match
- Ambrose lost to Rollins at Elimination Chamber for the belt due to DQ
- Ambrose lost the MITB match against Rollins for the belt but afterwards he cut a promo saying he'd eventually be WWE Champion



- Ambrose teamed with Reigns against the Wyatts and they end up beating Wyatt/Harper at Summerslam
- Ambrose, Reigns and Jericho lost to the Wyatts at Night of Champions
- Ambrose beats Breeze, Ziggler and Owens to make it to the finals of the WWE Championship tourney in which he lost to Reigns.
- Ambrose beats Owens at TLC to become IC Champion
- Ambrose beats Ziggler and Owens in a triple threat title defense on SD
- Ambrose beats Sheamus in a steel cage match on Raw
- Ambrose beats Owens at Royal Rumble and keeps the IC title
- Ambrose makes it to the end of the Rumble and is eliminated by Triple H becoming the second contender
- Ambrose is entered into the FastLane triple threat match for a chance to face Triple H at WM against Reigns and Lesnar

And this isn't counting random loses on Raw and SD from time to time due to interference and such. Only recently has Ambrose gained any major wins but throughout all of that he's still the ultimate underdog here. Ambrose is actually the one who's received literally no comeuppance anytime he was screwed. He's still the Shield member who hasn't become champion, he's still the Shield member who's not as pushed as the other two, he's still the one who wasn't even offered to join the Authority like the other two and beyond that, his issues with the Authority are still out there and he's more over than Reigns. There hasn't been 1 time where Ambrose has gained any positives against these guys. You take away that random Harper win and these IC title wins and all he has is being screwed by the Authority and losing to the Wyatts.

It's not really hard to do. Just take the IC title from Ambrose and boom put him in that spot.

Eventually a time will come where they're going to have to bring up Ambrose's constant loses at not getting the belt and constant screws from the Authority. It just makes the most sense this way especially considering Reigns for example, he's going to eventually face Brock at Summerslam so not only will he finally get his Brock win but he'll beat the Authority too? Ambrose probably won't get either of those. Just another case of giving too much to 1 guy and not dispersing it correctly. I'd let Reigns take care of Brock while Ambrose can take care of the Authority. Just don't give both to 1 guy.

[Feargus McReddit]

Jan 27, 2016 2:56:48 GMT -5 Dean-o said:

Jan 27, 2016 1:52:10 GMT -5 Pooh Carlson said:

The fans were able to manipulate the bookers one year and now they think they're entitled to be able to do that every year. Well they're not. It's actually a decent story that's being told, it'll be a good match, and the rest of the Mania card is gonna be rock solid full of talent. So just shut up everybody and enjoy the show.

For a company that loves to brag how they "listen & give the fans what they want", you make it sound like the WWE Universe had a hell of a nerve letting the WWE know they hated the direction Daniel Bryan was taking leading up to WrestleMania XXX.

I also think some people here don't understand one of the main cores of professional wrestling, which is having a large crowd that are practically weekly focus testers. Not catering to their whims fully, just factoring that into booking.

[EoE: Workin On My Night Cheese]

Let's say, hope against hope, that Ambrose wins at Fastlane and gets the WrestleMania 32 title shot. Do they hotshot the Triple H v Ambrose title match for RAW or the Network Special in Toronto to get the title onto Ambrose and keep the Triple H/Reigns match in play for WM without it being for the title? Who does Ambrose defend against at WM in that case? Jericho, like the supposed IC title match? Do you hotshot the Lesnar/Wyatt Family program and have him defend against Lesnar? What about the IC belt, does he lose that to someone else?

Or if they keep the Triple H/Ambrose match for WM... Who the hell does Reigns fight?

[________ has left the building]

Jan 27, 2016 4:40:58 GMT -5 EoE: Workin On My Night Cheese said:

Let's say, hope against hope, that Ambrose wins at Fastlane and gets the WM title shot. Do they hotshot the Triple H v Ambrose title match for RAW or the Network Special in Toronto to get the title onto Ambrose and keep the Triple H/Reigns match in play for WM without it being for the title? Who does Ambrose defend against at WM in that case? Jericho, like the supposed IC title match? Do you hotshot the Lesnar/Wyatt Family program and have him defend against Lesnar? What about the IC belt, does he lose that to someone else?

Or if they keep the Triple H/Ambrose match for WM... Who the hell does Reigns fight?

Going by how the board feels currently, Roman faces no one at Mania and is deemed a failure like Diesel. If anything, WWE might make it a triple threat between Ambrose, Reigns, and Trips for the title. But more than likely it's Roman vs Hunter with the McMahons putting a full court press putting over him.

[Oh Cry Me a Screwball]

Man, the pop that would occur if Roman went for the spear, but Ambrose got Roman at the last second and turned Roman's momentum into a Dirty Deeds and got the pin.

[Starshine]

Why do we keep comparing Reigns to Cena/Lesnar/Taker/et al? There's no mathematical formula to how long it takes to make a number 1 main eventer, or equation that they must have so many 4 star matches before he can be the legitimate top guy. Besides, they're not trying to make him into any main event guy, they're positioning him to be their next Cena/Rock/Austin/Hogan. There's a big difference between the two and you cannot force the latter as they've tried to. Almost anyone on the roster can hold the top belt, that isn't the issue. It's this stubborn ideal they've force fed us that he's supposedly supposed to be this diamond in the rough who will lead WWE into the next 10 or so years.

So I ask, what is so special about Roman Reigns that he needs to be their top guy? He's not that over when compared to past flag bearers. He's not a dynamic personality. He's not a good promo, which is a HUGE handicap in WWE. He's not an amazing ring general. He's just a good wrestler who's being pushed beyond his skill level, and past the patience of a vocal portion of the fans. If he was unquestionably and consistently over ala Batista in '05, none of this would be an issue. But he's not, and it begs the question again, what is so special about Roman Reigns compared to anyone else in that company?

[Fauxnaki]

This whole angle would of made more sense for dean then roman anyway so im all for it

[baerrtt]

Jan 27, 2016 5:20:16 GMT -5 Starshine said:

Why do we keep comparing Reigns to Cena/Lesnar/Taker/et al? There's no mathematical formula to how long it takes to make a number 1 main eventer, or equation that they must have so many 4 star matches before he can be the legitimate top guy. Besides, they're not trying to make him into any main event guy, they're positioning him to be their next Cena/Rock/Austin/Hogan. There's a big difference between the two and you cannot force the latter as they've tried to. Almost anyone on the roster can hold the top belt, that isn't the issue. It's this stubborn ideal they've force fed us that he's supposedly supposed to be this diamond in the rough who will lead WWE into the next 10 or so years.

So I ask, what is so special about Roman Reigns that he needs to be their top guy? He's not that over when compared to past flag bearers. He's not a dynamic personality. He's not a good promo, which is a HUGE handicap in WWE. He's not an amazing ring general. He's just a good wrestler who's being pushed beyond his skill level, and past the patience of a vocal portion of the fans. If he was unquestionably and consistently over ala Batista in '05, none of this would be an issue. But he's not, and it begs the question again, what is so special about Roman Reigns compared to anyone else in that company?

I've said it before on these forums when someone asked 'Why Reigns?' but when it comes to Vince's criteria of whom he sees as the face of the company I simply believes he observes who he feels has the potential to be the most marketable to casuals, women and Post Rock possibly Hollywood etc and Roman's good looks (IMO the main factor) put him in good stead the moment the Shield gimmick appeared on our screens.

[Big Bad Kahuna]

I have this feeling he will get this big WM moment and there will be a huge heel Roman vs. face champ Ambrose program afterwards (with Roman winning the title very soon)

[Big Bad Kahuna]

Jan 27, 2016 1:52:10 GMT -5 Pooh Carlson said:

So the only way to prove yourself ready to be the champion of the company is to only lose clean all the time? Huh? Honestly this whole Reigns backlash is ridiculous. He needs to put in his time? He debuted in 2012, went solo in 2014, finally won the championship a year and a half later. It took 3 solid years from debut to first championship, meanwhile he was putting on consistently good matches. Roughly the same amount of time from Cena's debut to first title win. Taker took only a year to win after his debut. Lesnar was mere months. It's not putting time and dues in. It's this new entitled internet everybody-has-a-voice-and-has-to-get-their-way. I'm sick of it. Bryan deserved to be in the main event because they spent a year telling that story. There wasn't any other way to end that story and though WWE was stubborn at first, they realized their mistake. They've spent the last half year telling a Roman vs Authority story. To have Ambrose swoop in and get the title shot instead of Roman a month before the big event would make ZEEEERRRRROOOOO sense from a story telling perspective. The fans were able to manipulate the bookers one year and now they think they're entitled to be able to do that every year. Well they're not. It's actually a decent story that's being told, it'll be a good match, and the rest of the Mania card is gonna be rock solid full of talent. So just shut up everybody and enjoy the show.

you're right. but it's too late. too many mistakes were made with the handling of Roman's character, and too many fans aren't accepting his role. Ambrose is the way to go right now, Reigns has to turn heel to save face

[celtics543]

Jan 27, 2016 0:15:44 GMT -5 thelonewolf527 said:

Nope. You don't build 5 months of story with Reigns/Triple H just to not give it the right conclusion it should have.

And Reigns getting booed at Mania was going to happen even if he became the most over guy on the roster. The people who fly into Manias and such every year will be the same people and they always hate guys like Reigns. That's why Cena can't get a good reaction going into Mania either in spite of what he's done in recent years.

To be fair they built 8 months of story with Daniel Bryan between Summerslam and Wrestlemania 30 and still tried to give the main event to Orton and Batista. It took a damn revolution to get Bryan in that match.

[Pooh Carlson]

Jan 27, 2016 6:45:12 GMT -5 Big Bad Kahuna said:

Jan 27, 2016 1:52:10 GMT -5 Pooh Carlson said:

So the only way to prove yourself ready to be the champion of the company is to only lose clean all the time? Huh? Honestly this whole Reigns backlash is ridiculous. He needs to put in his time? He debuted in 2012, went solo in 2014, finally won the championship a year and a half later. It took 3 solid years from debut to first championship, meanwhile he was putting on consistently good matches. Roughly the same amount of time from Cena's debut to first title win. Taker took only a year to win after his debut. Lesnar was mere months. It's not putting time and dues in. It's this new entitled internet everybody-has-a-voice-and-has-to-get-their-way. I'm sick of it. Bryan deserved to be in the main event because they spent a year telling that story. There wasn't any other way to end that story and though WWE was stubborn at first, they realized their mistake. They've spent the last half year telling a Roman vs Authority story. To have Ambrose swoop in and get the title shot instead of Roman a month before the big event would make ZEEEERRRRROOOOO sense from a story telling perspective. The fans were able to manipulate the bookers one year and now they think they're entitled to be able to do that every year. Well they're not. It's actually a decent story that's being told, it'll be a good match, and the rest of the Mania card is gonna be rock solid full of talent. So just shut up everybody and enjoy the show.

you're right. but it's too late. too many mistakes were made with the handling of Roman's character, and too many fans aren't accepting his role. Ambrose is the way to go right now, Reigns has to turn heel to save face

I agree Roman should turn heel but that doesn't mean you take him out of the main event. That solidifies even more that he SHOULD be in the main event. The way I see it, The Authority should go away for awhile after Mania, bring in a new power figure. Maybe Triple H is removed by the board for getting too involved physically, it's happened before. Roman wins the championship and if he gets booed out of the building, GREAT. The next night on Raw, Roman and Dean are in the ring and slowly Roman's promo turns into him complaining about how, despite thwarting the evil Authority, the fans still boo him. Well he doesn't need the fans, he doesn't need anybody. He's on his own, and he attacks Ambrose for the icing on the cake. Now you got face Ambrose chasing heel Roman. And the WWE fans being the WWE fans will complain and say "Why does Ambrose get a shot at the title? AJ Styles deserves it more!" And everytime Ambrose is on screen, he'll be booed and the crowd will chant "We want AJ!"

[RIHT]

These threads always include a bold post "standing up" against the Reigns push and explaining why he doesn't deserve the push and how it's bad, then another one calling out fans for blaming Roman when it's WWE's fault and saying to not hate him and try to enjoy his push, and maybe a humorous post in between to lighten the mood.

[sunnytaker]

just let him go on a heel rampage for a bit. since he's a heel a large number of those people booing him will start to think he's the "cool 'bad guy' wrecking machine" again and start cheering him and wanting him to turn face. so when he does he'll get cheered like the immediate post SHIELD face turn aftermath before the "chosen one" stuff started getting momentum and turned people against him.

[the2ndevil]

Jan 27, 2016 9:54:11 GMT -5 sunnytaker said:

just let him go on a heel rampage for a bit. since he's a heel a large number of those people booing him will start to think he's the "cool 'bad guy' wrecking machine" again and start cheering him and wanting him to turn face. so when he does he'll get cheered like the immediate post SHIELD face turn aftermath before the "chosen one" stuff started getting momentum and turned people against him.

On one hand, I do think he's best suited for that, but on the other, I don't want to lose the ReignBrose bromance.

[saintpat]

Jan 27, 2016 1:52:10 GMT -5 Pooh Carlson said:

So the only way to prove yourself ready to be the champion of the company is to only lose clean all the time? Huh? Honestly this whole Reigns backlash is ridiculous. He needs to put in his time? He debuted in 2012, went solo in 2014, finally won the championship a year and a half later. It took 3 solid years from debut to first championship, meanwhile he was putting on consistently good matches. Roughly the same amount of time from Cena's debut to first title win. Taker took only a year to win after his debut. Lesnar was mere months. It's not putting time and dues in. It's this new entitled internet everybody-has-a-voice-and-has-to-get-their-way. I'm sick of it. Bryan deserved to be in the main event because they spent a year telling that story. There wasn't any other way to end that story and though WWE was stubborn at first, they realized their mistake. They've spent the last half year telling a Roman vs Authority story. To have Ambrose swoop in and get the title shot instead of Roman a month before the big event would make ZEEEERRRRROOOOO sense from a story telling perspective. The fans were able to manipulate the bookers one year and now they think they're entitled to be able to do that every year. Well they're not. It's actually a decent story that's being told, it'll be a good match, and the rest of the Mania card is gonna be rock solid full of talent. So just shut up everybody and enjoy the show.

A year ago, you couldn't look at this forum without tripping over four or five threads with a "Roman is fine, it's just too soon, let him do it next year" theme. Now it's next year and the tone has changed. RR has put on solid main event-level matches, he's gotten plenty of pop (which his detractors try to ignore) and, mostly, he's part of a storyline that needs to play out to a logical conclusion.

[FAR5222]

Wyatts take out Lesnar and they do a spot where Ambrose and Reigns' shoulders are down and Authority deems no one is going to Mania to fight HHH. Then somehow along the way a triple threat is booked. Fast Lane will have an ending no one likes.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 4:40:58 GMT -5 EoE: Workin On My Night Cheese said:

Let's say, hope against hope, that Ambrose wins at Fastlane and gets the WrestleMania 32 title shot. Do they hotshot the Triple H v Ambrose title match for RAW or the Network Special in Toronto to get the title onto Ambrose and keep the Triple H/Reigns match in play for WM without it being for the title? Who does Ambrose defend against at WM in that case? Jericho, like the supposed IC title match? Do you hotshot the Lesnar/Wyatt Family program and have him defend against Lesnar? What about the IC belt, does he lose that to someone else?

Or if they keep the Triple H/Ambrose match for WM... Who the hell does Reigns fight?

I'd give him Taker since Taker still has no WM opponent. Somebody needs to face Taker and by somebody I mean someone legitimate who isn't extremely unsafe like Braun Strowman. They can have a good match and he can earn Taker's respect passing him the torch and be good.