|
Post by King Devitt and the Woke Mob on Oct 22, 2021 9:30:02 GMT -5
So..uh...
Roman Mahal?
Jinder Reigns?
What do you think we should go with?
What about the USingh Brothers?
|
|
|
Post by blackwrestlingfan on Oct 22, 2021 9:48:04 GMT -5
I don’t think Roman needs to lose the title yet but he does need to lose. Him losing to Big E at Survivor Series is a perfect way to give his reign some more juice and push Big E hard.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Oct 22, 2021 10:34:54 GMT -5
Losing to Big E. is a minor setback... and over a year into the title reign is way too long for his first minor setback.
Dude needs to lose the title sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by Lizuka #BLM on Oct 22, 2021 10:43:57 GMT -5
I really don't see any reason to even do Roman vs. Big E. One, because the whole Survivor Series month of filler thing is f***ing stupid to start with, and two, Big E's title reign already kicked off with Roman beating him twice in one night solely to remind people that he's the only person on the roster who actually matters.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Oct 22, 2021 11:05:14 GMT -5
Romanmania chased a lot of people away. However we've been in Romanmania for so long that a sizable % of the viewers are OK with it. So if you stop it now you lose the remaining viewers. I mean... that's basically the sunk cost fallacy...
|
|
|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Oct 22, 2021 11:58:55 GMT -5
I really don't see any reason to even do Roman vs. Big E. One, because the whole Survivor Series month of filler thing is f***ing stupid to start with IT'S THE ONE TIME A YEAR SMACKDOWN AND RAW GO HEAD-TO-HEAD IN DIRECT COMPETITION! HOW f***ING DARE YOU!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2021 12:13:16 GMT -5
I really don't see any reason to even do Roman vs. Big E. One, because the whole Survivor Series month of filler thing is f***ing stupid to start with IT'S THE ONE TIME A YEAR SMACKDOWN AND RAW GO HEAD-TO-HEAD IN DIRECT COMPETITION! HOW f***ING DARE YOU!?
|
|
|
Post by The Heartbreak TWERK on Oct 22, 2021 12:39:42 GMT -5
IT'S THE ONE TIME A YEAR SMACKDOWN AND RAW GO HEAD-TO-HEAD IN DIRECT COMPETITION! HOW f***ING DARE YOU!? View AttachmentI would appreciate if you did not quote or try to interact with me in any way on this forum or any other. What you did was beyond unacceptable.
|
|
Gus Richlen: Ruffian
Patti Mayonnaise
Metal Maestro: Co-winner of the FAN Idol Throwdown!
BAU BAU
Posts: 39,191
|
Post by Gus Richlen: Ruffian on Oct 22, 2021 14:19:17 GMT -5
....What did I just walk in on?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2021 14:30:40 GMT -5
Romanmania chased a lot of people away. However we've been in Romanmania for so long that a sizable % of the viewers are OK with it. So if you stop it now you lose the remaining viewers. I mean... that's basically the sunk cost fallacy... Reminds me of Cena arguments back in the day. Hard to argue that Cena both repelled fans and drew others. I don't think a lot of people really left because of Roman. I think many people's issues with the company that would cause them to stop watching would have Roman as a symptom, but not the cause. On top of that, I don't think that those who left because of Roman would flock back if he were jobbed out or disappeared anyways. I don't know what the solution WWE needs is, but I think it's far bigger than just the booking of Reigns.
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Oct 22, 2021 14:36:15 GMT -5
I mean... that's basically the sunk cost fallacy... Reminds me of Cena arguments back in the day. Hard to argue that Cena both repelled fans and drew others. I don't think a lot of people really left because of Roman. I think many people's issues with the company that would cause them to stop watching would have Roman as a symptom, but not the cause. On top of that, I don't think that those who left because of Roman would flock back if he were jobbed out or disappeared anyways. I don't know what the solution WWE needs is, but I think it's far bigger than just the booking of Reigns. Not having a boner for booking heat segments for heels is a start.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2021 15:00:57 GMT -5
Reminds me of Cena arguments back in the day. Hard to argue that Cena both repelled fans and drew others. I don't think a lot of people really left because of Roman. I think many people's issues with the company that would cause them to stop watching would have Roman as a symptom, but not the cause. On top of that, I don't think that those who left because of Roman would flock back if he were jobbed out or disappeared anyways. I don't know what the solution WWE needs is, but I think it's far bigger than just the booking of Reigns. Not having a boner for booking heat segments for heels is a start. True... But we could end up with a situation where heels aren't taken seriously at all, like during Cena's reign. I just don't think it's as simple as a one sentence solution, but it is a start. Omega's title reign is pretty filled with heat segments as well but AEW doesn't have the same stigma that WWE does. Omega may not have as many as Reigns but it's still fairly tilted in the direction of heat segments, yet AEW fans for the most part trust that a story is being told. I truly think the solution that is there for WWE isn't something that can change in a few weeks. WWE needs to rebuild good will with their fanbase. When a story is created like Woods fighting for years to become KOTR and the vast majority of people think he will slip on a banana peel, fail, and then have it never mentioned again, then that's an opportunity for WWE to show the fans that they can still follow through with a proper story and rebuild some faith. That was a step in the right direction but now we need to ask the question of what does this win do for Woods? What does this loss do for Balor? Those are the questions that WWE fails to ask and answer satisfyingly and I think it's that type of thing that is eroding the fanbase. I don't think the goodwill they need to rebuild is the idea of faces winning, but the idea of a proper story being told. It's fine for Reigns to beat Cesaro, but how does that change Cesaro? How does he move forward afterwards? WWE has tons of characters but never shows their growth or allows them to truly change based on what is happening around them. Reigns being the same character after every encounter and having nothing effect or change the guy is what is causing my lack of interest, not just the simple fact that he's a bad guy who always wins.
|
|
Nr1Humanoid
Hank Scorpio
Is the #3 humanoid at best.
Posts: 5,583
|
Post by Nr1Humanoid on Oct 22, 2021 16:05:59 GMT -5
Crown Jewel makes it official; I am watching no more tribal chief Roman matches.
|
|
Kalmia
King Koopa
Happy to be here
Posts: 12,536
|
Post by Kalmia on Oct 22, 2021 16:19:23 GMT -5
Yeah, I've been bored of Roman as champ for months and any chance of me watching Smackdown has basically gone because of him. I could cope with a dominant heel champ if there was a longer story being told and we were moving towards a legit challenger. I can get through and even enjoy Omega and the Elite beating people down because I know that the longer story is Hangman winning the big one. But between Roman's strong booking and the lack of any challengers being built up, it's just a real slog to get through his title reign.
IMO, WWE is failing Roman by not giving him genuine challengers. You're not a strong champ if you're only beating chumps, and all WWE is giving Roman is challengers booked as chumps. Guys like Balor didn't have to be chumps but that's what they've been made to be.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Oct 25, 2021 8:31:24 GMT -5
Not having a boner for booking heat segments for heels is a start. True... But we could end up with a situation where heels aren't taken seriously at all, like during Cena's reign. I just don't think it's as simple as a one sentence solution, but it is a start. Omega's title reign is pretty filled with heat segments as well but AEW doesn't have the same stigma that WWE does. Omega may not have as many as Reigns but it's still fairly tilted in the direction of heat segments, yet AEW fans for the most part trust that a story is being told. I truly think the solution that is there for WWE isn't something that can change in a few weeks. WWE needs to rebuild good will with their fanbase. When a story is created like Woods fighting for years to become KOTR and the vast majority of people think he will slip on a banana peel, fail, and then have it never mentioned again, then that's an opportunity for WWE to show the fans that they can still follow through with a proper story and rebuild some faith. That was a step in the right direction but now we need to ask the question of what does this win do for Woods? What does this loss do for Balor? Those are the questions that WWE fails to ask and answer satisfyingly and I think it's that type of thing that is eroding the fanbase. I don't think the goodwill they need to rebuild is the idea of faces winning, but the idea of a proper story being told. It's fine for Reigns to beat Cesaro, but how does that change Cesaro? How does he move forward afterwards? WWE has tons of characters but never shows their growth or allows them to truly change based on what is happening around them. Reigns being the same character after every encounter and having nothing effect or change the guy is what is causing my lack of interest, not just the simple fact that he's a bad guy who always wins. I made a thread about this awhile ago, but I think a strong point here is how you'll sometimes (certainly not always) see a lot of WWE shows rated by fans based on match outcomes, rather than on actual overall quality of storylines/progression/etc. WWE has seemingly encouraged this mindset: you'll get occasional shows where they book a number of crowd favorites to win, and then people will talk about how much fun that show was, but then things tend to revert back to the status quo. WWE's typical match psychology/layout contributes to this, as well: it's often quite repetitive and really doesn't put a spotlight on in-ring storytelling (again, not always, but often enough). This emphasis on match outcomes deemphasizes the importance of the journeys involved in arriving at the outcomes, but also means that follow-through is neglected, as well: it's hard to ignore WWE's track record of, for example, putting their main title on favorites like Bryan or Kofi, or even Benoit back in the day before everything that happened, in big spots like Wrestlemania, but then clearly have no plan for where their title reigns were meant to go or what they were supposed to accomplish. Benoit won the belt off Triple H, but remained a secondary player on Raw throughout his reign; Bryan and Kofi won to huge reactions, but were both planned to have somewhat low-heat feuds before getting massacred by Lesnar, then being shuffled down the card (Bryan's injuries at the time obviously helped him avoid that). So it goes back to the key problem so many people are saying they have with WWE over the years: matches, angles, promos, etc. don't feel like they matter. They happen, they might even get a decent reaction in the moment, but then they're done with and don't leave a lasting impression in most cases.
|
|
|
Post by mistery on Nov 5, 2021 20:59:25 GMT -5
Time to bend the knee to misery booking!!!
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Nov 5, 2021 21:09:48 GMT -5
At this point, I want the "babyfaces win every match" thing just to apply against Roman and Roman alone.
|
|
|
Post by Von Wagner's Brownies on Nov 5, 2021 21:22:14 GMT -5
|
|
Chiral
Salacious Crumb
Posts: 76,594
|
Post by Chiral on Nov 5, 2021 22:12:29 GMT -5
For reference: -All night an Xavier vs. Jimmy match where the loser bends the knee to the winner is hyped up -Xavier wins -Jimmy hesitates but before he can even do it Roman and Jey beat down Xavier and Kofi. Show ends.
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Nov 5, 2021 22:14:23 GMT -5
Can't let the faces win even when they win. Brilliant. Love that writing, great material.
|
|