Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2023 11:25:10 GMT -5
Short anwser NO.
|
|
Kalmia
King Koopa
Happy to be here
Posts: 12,535
|
Post by Kalmia on Jan 30, 2023 11:31:20 GMT -5
I don't think so, not yet anyway. Despite WWE's best efforts, he didn't click with crowds as a top guy or draw until he started his current gimmick and that's only been 2-3 years. I think what happens with him after he loses the titles will determine whether he's in that conversation or not.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Jan 30, 2023 11:32:56 GMT -5
No but he does belong in the same camp as Ric Flair, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels as those guys who kept the lights on during down periods.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Free Moon-Down with Burger on Jan 30, 2023 11:37:04 GMT -5
Not quite in the tip top class but he’s a slight cut above Bret and HBK
If he comes out of this big run and keeps going? Maybe turns face and becomes even bigger? We’re gonna have to have that talk
|
|
mcstoklasa
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,976
|
Post by mcstoklasa on Jan 30, 2023 11:39:00 GMT -5
He's been great for about 3 years but he sucked for about five before that so it's hard to tell
|
|
|
Post by Jindrak Mark on Jan 30, 2023 11:44:32 GMT -5
If this is about long-term faces of the company Bruno should probably be on there instead of Rock. As popular as Rock was he was always number two to Austin other than those 9 months when Austin was out injured in 2000-01. No but he does belong in the same camp as Ric Flair, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels as those guys who kept the lights on during down periods. It's not a down period though. Ratings, ticket sales and revenue are all up.
|
|
Fade
Patti Mayonnaise
Posts: 38,519
|
Post by Fade on Jan 30, 2023 12:38:36 GMT -5
As everyone’s said, if we’re going by the metric of making money, etc. nah. We’re still in it and even if dude winds up going Hollywood, think we still got a bit of Roman in WWE for us.
As far as personal opinion..? If we’re talking “The Guys”, he’s near the top for me on personal preference alone. I’ve already enjoyed his run immensely more than Cena’s because he’s actually played a character.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Jan 30, 2023 13:12:06 GMT -5
I'd say no. But then you can't really make that judgment until hindsight in a lot of cases. Look at how Cena is seen now compared to how he was viewed even 5 years ago.
|
|
asuka007
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 23,661
|
Post by asuka007 on Jan 30, 2023 13:14:50 GMT -5
No. He’s only recently found his groove in the last few years after nearly a decade of a failed babyface push.
And he just isn’t the draw or icon in pop culture that the others are either.
He’s probably on the rung just below that. With guys like Bret, Shawn, Macho Man, etc.
|
|
Venti
Unicron
Posts: 3,002
|
Post by Venti on Jan 30, 2023 13:30:08 GMT -5
Maybe once this run is finished up
|
|
|
Post by SneakMan on Jan 30, 2023 13:43:18 GMT -5
Nah. There really has been this kinda weird swing to overly praising Reigns now that he is actually in a good role and doing good work (Probably by people who feel embarassed that they fell into the Cena trick of shitting on a good worker because of VKM thrice - hey, Sheamus!). There's no hope in hell of Roman Reigns joining the Hogan/Austin/Rock/Cena tier, it's too late in the day. This man is slotting into the Batista/HBK/Hart/HHH tier. There's no harm in that, and it's a really good place to be, but there's a gulf between that and the absolute upper echelon. It's not even that no one knows who he is, it's that he spent 5 years being rejected by fans and presiding over an era of absolutely dismal ratings, it's that his title reign was f***ing intermiable when McMahon was booking it. These aren't things you can wash away with a few flashes of good booking. Who knows, maybe the combined force of people who WANT Roman Reigns to be the Thanos of WWE, WWE propaganda (Hey, it worked for Undertaker!) and kids growing up on this will conspire to slot him in as the fifth all-timer - but I was there for it and you're not going to fool me. This, this, all of this. I've been a Reigns fan pretty much ever since the glory days of The Shield, but he's not a ratings mover the way Cena was/is, he's certainly not a draw on the level of Hogan or Austin, and he damn sure is not a crossover star like The Rock. Very little of this is his fault - Reigns' face run was, more often than not, a masterclass of how not to book a top babyface, and WWE has spent the past decade conditioning fans that the WWE brand is the only star that matters. But at the end of the day, the two defining features of Reigns' career are a face run that saw him perceived by fans both online and in arenas as the embodiment of everything wrong with WWE, and a hot heel run that's had as many lows as it's had highs. That ain't GOAT material, and anybody trying to claim otherwise is definitely overcompensating.
|
|
tirtefaa
Unicron
If you wanna know the truth, you gotta dig up Johnny Booth.
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by tirtefaa on Jan 30, 2023 13:55:39 GMT -5
I'm going to say no. I'm also going to say it's never going to happen, at least as far as I can see.
This isn't a knock on Roman or anyone else, but the audience watches WWE for WWE. It is a built in audience that will watch, so if Roman were to disappear in a couple months, then I doubt the audience is going to dip from that.
The thing that Hogan and Austin specifically did was tap into a mainstream audience who would have otherwise not watched wrestling, and gotten them to watch.
I genuinely don't know if there is a WWE Mt. Rushmore, since those two guys are in their own stratosphere.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 24,176
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 30, 2023 14:03:04 GMT -5
I think it's going to become increasingly difficult to compare eras due to the brand being the draw as detailed above.
Do the Saudi shows, the way WWE exploit whales, current TV deals, social media and international reach put Roman above some of the other names if you use certain metrics?
However even if that was the case Roman might headline shows that made WWE a fortune but was he really the draw? To an extent but not in the way Hogan was.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 24,176
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 30, 2023 14:38:34 GMT -5
Not sure how accutrate these figures are but regardless I think it's clear the Saudi shows make more than WM has historicially and using traditional logic Roman gets the credit for being the top guy during this period. Of course that also means Logan Paul is one of the top draws of all time. I've never liked the idea that the business side is the main criteria for comparing potential GOATs and I think it just shows that it's going to become an increasingly unfair comparrison.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Jan 30, 2023 20:04:27 GMT -5
Nobody would have put Cena up there at the equivalent point of his run at the top. But I'd say no for now, with two caveats... A) Roman with his current gimmick would be a top guy in any era B) Everyone gets a big bump in popularity when they are retired and don't show up very often. And when there is a new top guy to complain about. Combine those two things and Roman will likely be seen in an even better light in 10 years time. Cena was pretty much already considerd an all-timer in the same amount of time. Roman has been THE GUY... for almost a decade. In roughly the same amount of time from their first title win to now, Cena was wrestling Daniel Bryan and was pretty much done as the top guy, and certainly on the decline.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Jan 30, 2023 20:07:26 GMT -5
I think it's going to become increasingly difficult to compare eras due to the brand being the draw as detailed above. Do the Saudi shows, the way WWE exploit whales, current TV deals, social media and international reach put Roman above some of the other names if you use certain metrics? However even if that was the case Roman might headline shows that made WWE a fortune but was he really the draw? To an extent but not in the way Hogan was. I mean also look at the shows that Roman was out for and there wasn't a significant decline in the money being brought in either... and things like TV Deals were built by like the ratings Cena was bringing in too... so it's especially hard to just look at the finances... doubley so that Vince basically spend most of the end of Cena's time on top turning WWE into the star and basically making sure that it will always be making money.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 14,055
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Jan 30, 2023 21:53:20 GMT -5
With the GOAT’s, Bruno Sammartino has to be on there too. He was the first guy they built the company around and defined the territory era as much as the others did in their respective times.
And unless he retains at Mania and keeps on going, Roman ain’t never breaking his record.
|
|
|
Post by Gerard Gerard on Jan 30, 2023 22:38:34 GMT -5
He’d be the only one to make WWE Rushmore as a heel which has to feel like vindication for everyone who spent years screaming for him to turn.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Jan 31, 2023 6:21:43 GMT -5
No but he does belong in the same camp as Ric Flair, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels as those guys who kept the lights on during down periods. This is anything but a down period, though. WWE is pretty much more profitable now than ever. Ticket sales are sky high, ratings are up year over year despite cord cutting, and the Bloodline/Reigns are a big reason that the company is seen as hot right now. And if we’re talking kayfabe pillars of the company, I think Reigns is absolutely up there with Bruno, Hogan, Austin, Cena as the pillar of the company.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Jan 31, 2023 6:29:11 GMT -5
Nah. There really has been this kinda weird swing to overly praising Reigns now that he is actually in a good role and doing good work (Probably by people who feel embarassed that they fell into the Cena trick of shitting on a good worker because of VKM thrice - hey, Sheamus!). There's no hope in hell of Roman Reigns joining the Hogan/Austin/Rock/Cena tier, it's too late in the day. This man is slotting into the Batista/HBK/Hart/HHH tier. There's no harm in that, and it's a really good place to be, but there's a gulf between that and the absolute upper echelon. It's not even that no one knows who he is, it's that he spent 5 years being rejected by fans and presiding over an era of absolutely dismal ratings, it's that his title reign was f***ing intermiable when McMahon was booking it. These aren't things you can wash away with a few flashes of good booking. Who knows, maybe the combined force of people who WANT Roman Reigns to be the Thanos of WWE, WWE propaganda (Hey, it worked for Undertaker!) and kids growing up on this will conspire to slot him in as the fifth all-timer - but I was there for it and you're not going to fool me. If the reason you think he’s not up there is because he spent 5 years being rejected by fans, that would disqualify Cena too. Also very hard to call ratings dismal when they’ve pretty much always are near the top of cable ratings and continually getting higher and higher TV rights deals.
|
|