FMKK

There had been talk earlier in the year that Rollins would go to Smackdown so maybe they'll send him there and make SD a full ROH tribute show

I was looking forward to his intro and agreed; can’t imagine how it could have gone worse. For someone who didn't watch, what was wrong with it! Just a by-the-numbers, verbose-without-saying-anything Heyman promo?

Theres really no reason for these things to run so long. Its shitty for Bill for the place to be empty by the time he gets on stage. Ill bet plenty of fans had gone off to go to Spring Break too. They could do four inductions a year and relegate the celebrity and Warrior shit to a video package, but that will obviously never happen cause the mainstream appeal of Kid Rock in 2018 is obviously gigantic

I dont know why, but I have a feeling that Rollins will be an early challenger. And an Ambrose heel feud seems nailed on. Roman works well as the bigger guy using his strength but, although the matches will be good, I cant imagine anyone getting an interesting programme out of Rollins or Bálor on top. If they slot Lashley into Brocks place and get back to the hoss wars they were doing around Summerslam Ill be more than pleased. Especially if it ends up with a long title run which Braun ends

Trolling

It seems highly unlikely that one can compare John Cena to an unreturned serve.

Where did this Shoemaker guy emerge from? I know he's been around for years now but it seems like he had a few years of relevance in like 2013 then faded away again.

If he came out to a new theme on the Raw after Mania that would really signify that he's cemented as the top guy now imo. But so many of their recent themes have been dogshit that I kinda wouldn't trust them to do it unless they licence a real song.

I'm not a populist. I'm part of an anarchosyndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting. By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more... Hey...how come your posts in this thread are (moderately) coherent and grammatically correct, but everywhere else they look like you type exclusively with your thumbs? Anyhow, I already slandered you once. Stop provoking me or I will slanderize you a second time. Maybe his account is run by a similar anarcho-syndicalist system and it's actually like ten guys

He is over the hump in terms of getting the loudest reactions, having the best matches etc. He's in a cadre with Lesnar, Cena and Strowman who are guaranteed to have their angles do 1 million plus views on YouTube every week for example. All they have to do is actually book the title run everyone has been expecting. Otherwise he's there.

This is straying from my original intention but I wonder if Roman actually doesnt have that great a body. It is very strange that hes basically never appeared topless on WWE TV

They push him as too stoical at times for sure. He entrance would be so much better if he just had a bit more swagger in his walk and demeanour. And a touch of Steve Austin trash talk. Actually, new music would be nice too. An actual popular rap song is probably too much to dream for. As for the Orton comparison, I think thats unfair to the point of slander. Randy Orton does the Randy Orton match that, depending on his opponent and motivation, ranges from **1/2 - ***1/2. Reigns has had legitimately great matches to the level that Orton never has. Hes worked vulnerable against Strowman, turning in one of the greatest babyface selling performances in company history. Hes worked as a power/bully guy against AJ, Rollins and Balor. Hes done the bloody brawler performances against Lesnar. Hes a great tag worker. Just far more variety and range than Orton has ever shown, and Im not even an Orton hater per se.

My view of an ace is the fact that the fans have to back the ace look if you hear the chant of roman, roman or alike after mania then I would view him as the ace the fans make the ace along with the booking I use Misawa as an example if the fans were not behind him would he have became ace by beating Jumbo in June 1990 ie having the torch passed to him once baba knew Misawa was over and liked by the fans. My view is the fans make the ace more than or equal to the booking we have very different views of what makes an ace I know wwe is also a face based promotion so roman need be a face ie getting face pops to be ace in wwe tradition correct if on not accurate in anyway here Does this mean that Cena wasnt the ace in 06-07? (Wouldve put that all in one post but Im typing on phone and the editing isnt the best)

Hes the most consistent worker in WWE, always gets heat in his matches and splits the crowd in a way that he can work against heels or faces.

I forgot to mention your article comparing him to Dory and Backlund but I totally intended to! That'll never happen in current WWE but he should certainly win all his feuds until Mania 35 at least.

It's pretty clear that Reigns is going to defeat Lesnar and win the Universal Championship on Sunday, blowing off stories that go back as far as Wrestlemania 30 in 2014. Does this mean he's finally going to be booked as the ace babyface that he's supposedly been for the last two or three years? He's obviously been booked as a top star - defeating HHH and Undertaker in Mania main events is proof of that - but he's never had the extended run as the top champion that one would expect from a babyface ace. The closest he's ever come to that was in 2016 when he beat HHH for the title and then had the excellent feud with AJ Styles but the Adderal suspension derailed that run. It''s unfortunately because that was probably the best presentation of his character since the main event push began in 2015. With that being said, is there a chance now that we'll get the title run they've held off on for all these years? The potential opponents are in place for it to be a truly legendary run, a la Cena in 2006-07. In fact, the potential feuds they could run would easily be enough for a great year long title reign or longer - Rollins, Balor, Joe, Strowman, Ambrose, Cena, Lashley if he comes in, Miz could be a transitional challenger, whoever gets called up from NXT and transferred from Smackdown could be in the mix too. There's a good mix there of faces and heels that a polarised crowd could whip up a great atmosphere for. He's still not universally over as a babyface but the Lesnar angles have gotten us to a point where more fans are vocally in favour of Reigns than ever before, recreating the hot dynamic Cena had going. There's also a healthy mix of challengers that you could easily feed him and opponents who are worthy of big time feuds and matches. I feel like the stars are aligning for something special here that would really make the guy seem like the man in WWE. The second question is whether WWE are interested in this sort of booking anymore. We've all talked about how the brand is the star above any of the individuals on numerous occasions. It's also really striking to me how heel-dominated WWE's main event scene has been for years now. This was a promotion that was traditionally babyface orientated - Bruno, Backlund, Hogan, Bret, Shawn (the Attitude era was more hot shot) and Cena all got those career defining babyface title runs but we've not really had one since perhaps all the way back in 2007 with John proving himself as the top star. Are WWE no longer interested in booking this way? Is the top babyface ace as we've previously understood it an outmoded concept? Or have they simply been waiting til the time and the person are right in their eyes to be in that postion post-Cena? I for one think it'll be refreshing to see a proper top-dog ace title run for the first time in years after long periods of chickenshit heels and the part-time Lesnar.

Would smark crowds cheer Reigns because he's associated with Heyman though? Maybe, but I don't think it matters. But then what's the point of doing it when he already gets a mixed reaction? I don't like the idea pairing of Heyman with Rousey either tbh

Would smark crowds cheer Reigns because he's associated with Heyman though?

That's entirely untrue if you actually understand what the term is meant to describe; that is, the change in the operation and organisation of capitalism that began in the 1970s and the logic of which was politically hegemonic for about 35 years.

Heyman is an interesting case because he's become a boring and stale on screen character but there's been talk that he's had a hand in the booking of both the Goldberg and Reigns feuds with Lesnar in the last year, both of which have been very successful. So he still has value in that sense. But it seems unlikely that he'd be able to bring those ideas unless they were about someone he was specifically tied to on-screen.

I kinda don't want EC3 to win in the vain hope that it means he'll get called up really quickly. He'd be a great feud for Bryan.

Yeah, American politics for the last 25 years or so has been a debate about how much diversity (in the most tokenistic way) should be permitted within the administrating of neoliberal capitalism. Similar for Britain really.

Completely agree about Balor/Rollins. The best part of that match was The Miz on commentary and even he struggled to add any color to these bland, vanilla performers. His best lines were mostly about his newborn. I'm hoping The Miz retains the title on Sunday. I also think Balor/Rollins benefitted from a "Stockholm Syndrome" audience response where you have a captive live crowd that wants to see a "great match" and wants to get a "This is Awesome" chant going and then gets two guys with big reps that know how to pace a 20-minute match for the crowd in attendance. It might have been awesome in-person, but on TV, I found it tedious. It was an entertaining match but both are them are PlayStation wrestlers to me for the most part.

I would say things like that are more to do with people in power not caring about pro wrestling

His rise as the top promoter in wrestling and head of a globalised brand maps quite well onto the emergence of neoliberalism as the predominant political/economic force with the administrations of Reagan and Thatcher, although the imagery of 80s WWF borrows a lot more from the cultural domain of Reaganism than it does from the economic side obviously.