Matt D Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Pretty simple question here. I know some people said that the win Owens got was the one that Rusev really needed. The win by Owens meant somewhat more since Cena had just blown through Rusev, who they had spent the better part of the year beating. I'm not necessarily asking who's better in the ring, or even as a total package, but instead which of the two they should have strapped the rocket to? More so then, who had/has more upside to be put strong over Cena and to be built strong moving forward? Or at least situational upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 I'll wait until the feud is over before I make a judgement. Rusev won the first match against Cena too, before losing 3 straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillThompson Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Right now I'd say it's a 50/50 situation either way. Both men are heels in a way that WWE seems to no longer produce heels. They both can go in the ring, and they both have shown an ability to engage the crowd in ways that the majority of wrestlers presently can't. I think the rocket on either of these guy's backs would result in a potentially top of the mountain heel for the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Rusev Forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quentin Skinner Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 I'm really high on Rusev, but I think Owens was the better long term choice because he's so versatile and has the ability to be very effective as a face or heel. You can see this guy just gets "it", whatever "it" may be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocketCrypt Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Rusev could have been a made heel for years to come had they handled the Cena feud correctly. He was easily the most consistent TV performer in 2014 and delivered every time on PPV against an eclectic mix of opponents. There are elements of his gimmick that could be deemed campy, but that was counterbalanced by his aura of being a killer and just a tremendous overall package (Lana, the medal, the US title, great music, waving the flag to the ring and the flag above the ring). Just look at his feud with Swagger. There's a guy who had been with the company 6-7 years, been booked in main event feuds, held world titles etc. and yet never had a lick of relevance until he worked with Rusev. Aside from periods of the Cena feud, there was also no danger of Rusev ever getting face pops. Owens, on the other hand, is already getting split reactions from the multiple crowd demographics. I'd give Rusev the edge on every variable point of comparison. It's not even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Owens. Not sure how much run you can get out of a foreign menace character long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quentin Skinner Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Rusev was great in his role, but how LONG could a foreign monster heel role work in today's WWE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 The difference between Rusev and most foreign monsters is that Rusev is actually a foreign monster. He's closer to the Iron Sheik than NIkita Koloff. No matter what, he'll be the Bulgarian brute or whatever he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocketCrypt Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 And there's no rule which says every single feud has to be pro/anti US centric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOTNW Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Owens is a much more versatile performer and a lot better at actually engaging the crowd. The difference between Rusev and most foreign monsters is that Rusev is actually a foreign monster. He's closer to the Iron Sheik than NIkita Koloff. No matter what, he'll be the Bulgarian brute or whatever he is. And he'll just go around telling everyone how USA sucks? That's your idea of a main event heel in 2015? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Owens for many of the reasons others have already stated. Rusev isn't finished as a spoke in the wheel that is WWE. Ya can go in a lot of directions with the guy. I'd actually go the man with NO country route. Get rid of those two clowns they have with Rollins and put Rusev in a suit as Rollins enforcer by hire. Opens a lot of angles and match-ups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 No, the point is that he isn't just a monster foreign heel... it's that he is as close to the real deal as possible. Hell, the Ziggler story right now really isn't about Mother Russia or any other bullshit, it's about a lover scorned. If they do an angle where Rusev starts breaking guys ankles when he returns, it isn't about his heritage but how pissed he is that he was laid out. The foreign heel part is a bonus... it doesn't have to be his complete being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 I think they've pretty much been spot on with both guys to be honest. So far anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Rusev to me falls in the same category Earthquake, Big Boss Man, Umaga, Kamala, Mabel, Great Khali, King Kong Bundy and other monster heels in WWE history. What they all have in common is that they were built up strong for a big run on top, then when it was over, they cycled down. That's not a knock, it's just that he was plugged into a formula that probably goes back to the Vince Sr. days and has usually worked. I don't see him as a long term heel, but I do think he'll remain near the top, similar to all of them. Kevin Owens to me has more long term potential as a character. I don't think they are out to bury him. I think they just see it as a case where their work is done. His push was entirely to give Cena a Wrestlemania opponent. Now WM is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Owens. Rusev's not 'Murican. I am obviously posting in jest, but you know that's the thinking... Edit: Okay, neither is Owens, LOL, but there's a big difference between Canada and Bulgaria/Russia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Yeah, but he's not only from Canada. He's from Quebec. That's different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted June 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Natural heel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOTNW Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 No, the point is that he isn't just a monster foreign heel... it's that he is as close to the real deal as possible. Hell, the Ziggler story right now really isn't about Mother Russia or any other bullshit, it's about a lover scorned. If they do an angle where Rusev starts breaking guys ankles when he returns, it isn't about his heritage but how pissed he is that he was laid out. The foreign heel part is a bonus... it doesn't have to be his complete being. But it has been so far. They established that he was anti-USA and that he was undefeated. That was his character. He wasn't a monster heel because he was having 50/50 matches against Fandango and similarly placed midcarders. There was nothing more to him. If losing to John Cena was going to hurt him that much (which it did) then it would've been better if he had never ever gone over Cena in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Yeah, but he's not only from Canada. He's from Quebec. That's different... To the Canadian fans, yeah. But do most Americans really know the difference between, say, Toronto and Quebec? I'm not talking necessarily about the educated people on this forum, but rather the general masses who watch Raw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Yeah, but he's not only from Canada. He's from Quebec. That's different... To the Canadian fans, yeah. But do most Americans really know the difference between, say, Toronto and Quebec? I'm not talking necessarily about the educated people on this forum, but rather the general masses who watch Raw. Absolutely. Anglophone Canadians can easily pass for Americans (recall the hilarious "USA" chants during the Bret/Yoko match at WM9). Francophone Canadians are more clearly foreign. And cutting promos in a foreign language is always good for easy heat. Anyway, here's a question: would it have been better if Roman Reigns rather than Cena had been the one to beat Rusev? It's not like Cena gained anything from beating him, and having Reigns cut his teeth in the upper midcard seems preferable to fast-tracking him to a main event slot he clearly wasn't ready for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quentin Skinner Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Reigns was always my preferred choice for the one to beat Rusev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Yeah, but he's not only from Canada. He's from Quebec. That's different... To the Canadian fans, yeah. But do most Americans really know the difference between, say, Toronto and Quebec? I'm not talking necessarily about the educated people on this forum, but rather the general masses who watch Raw. Absolutely. Anglophone Canadians can easily pass for Americans (recall the hilarious "USA" chants during the Bret/Yoko match at WM9). Francophone Canadians are more clearly foreign. Yep. Rick Martel. Dino Bravo. The Fabulous Rougeau Brothers. The Quebecers. La Resistance (ok, this gimmick was dumb as fuck). The thing is, Kevin Steen isn't presented as a Quebecer per say like Dino or the Rougeaus were. But at some point, Steen could very weel speak french just to draw heat. Hell, picture a PPV main event in Montreal between Steen & Zayn (although I do think Zayn is part of the anglophone community of Montreal). Could they could do a Mania over there in a few years, with the induction of Carpentier, the Rougeaus and Martel ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Owens has an anglo name, speaks perfect English and isn't portrayed as French so I assume most people in the crowd wouldn't really peg him as a francophone Canadian, even though he's billed from Montreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted June 4, 2015 Report Share Posted June 4, 2015 Rick "The Model" Martel hailed from Cocoa Beach, Fl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.