WWE TV 8-10-8/16

[Johnny Sorrow]

At some point I want a Cena vs Lesnar match where Cena gets to avenge getting destroyed last year. But not for awhile, so they can tie together that awesome one from a few years ago that Cena won and was fucking brutal, the one from last year that was one sided and brutal, and a future one to settle the score. But spread across years.

[Russellmania]

At some point I want a Cena vs Lesnar match where Cena gets to avenge getting destroyed last year. But not for awhile, so they can tie together that awesome one from a few years ago that Cena won and was fucking brutal, the one from last year that was one sided and brutal, and a future one to settle the score. But spread across years.

I'm pretty sure they've retconned the Extreme Rules 2012 match.

[jcmmnx]

Cena wins at Summer Slam then Sheamus cashes in to leave Cena with the US belt. Then sign me up for some Sheamus vs Cesaro slugfests for the world title. Reigns should be the one to take the US belt off Cena. Brock or Cena can beat Sheamus and carry the belt into Mania. IDK what they do with Rollins once he drops the belt, and honestly I don't care. That guy is like Del Rio to me only about half as good of a worker.

[Badlittlekitten]

That's a bit harsh. Rollins is overexposed and overrated but he's a perfectly good sniveling heel prick given the right setting/editing. Del Rio has always been like watching paint dry.

[Loss]

Just commenting on something from before. I think Reigns has absolutely earned his stripes and proved that he belongs in main events this year. But fans just aren't going with it. There's no real enthusiasm or excitement around him -- no groundswell of support or feeling like he's on the verge of superstardom. I've seen comparisons to Diesel, but even then, Diesel was slowly building to a babyface turn for a long time off of the surprise response at the Rumble, and while business wasn't good, live crowds didn't really outright reject him. Instead, Reigns has been booked weak a lot of the year in an attempt to make him sympathetic when it's just chipped away at his aura. How do you buy someone who can't beat Bray Wyatt as a legitimate contender for Brock Lesnar? He also sells so much, which would normally be great and has for sure resulted in better matches, but I don't understand why he's not Goldberg-ing everyone in sight. I'm afraid that winning the Rumble has permanently destroyed him. I want to be wrong about that, and I hope that I am. But it seems like the more stubborn part of the WWE fanbase dug their heels in and decided that they are always going to resent him now that it's been made too obvious that he is hand-picked.

[goc]

He's still connecting to the audiences they really want to reach: women, kids and their parents. He's still selling a ton of merchandise. If the smarkety smarky don't like him I don't think it's going to matter. It hasn't kept John Cena from being the ace.

[Russellmania]

Just commenting on something from before. I think Reigns has absolutely earned his stripes and proved that he belongs in main events this year. But fans just aren't going with it. There's no real enthusiasm or excitement around him -- no groundswell of support or feeling like he's on the verge of superstardom. I've seen comparisons to Diesel, but even then, Diesel was slowly building to a babyface turn for a long time off of the surprise response at the Rumble, and while business wasn't good, live crowds didn't really outright reject him. Instead, Reigns has been booked weak a lot of the year in an attempt to make him sympathetic when it's just chipped away at his aura. How do you buy someone who can't beat Bray Wyatt as a legitimate contender for Brock Lesnar? He also sells so much, which would normally be great and has for sure resulted in better matches, but I don't understand why he's not Goldberg-ing everyone in sight. I'm afraid that winning the Rumble has permanently destroyed him. I want to be wrong about that, and I hope that I am. But it seems like the more stubborn part of the WWE fanbase dug their heels in and decided that they are always going to resent him now that it's been made too obvious that he is hand-picked.

I still stand by my belief that when Bryan first vacated the IC title they should have changed plans to have Reigns win the IC title and hold it all year. Then he could have still had plenty of solid programs and matches to continue proving himself, but could have kept winning as the defending champ. I know there'd be some fear that it would be too similar to Cena's current US title gimmick, but I don't really buy the idea that you can't have two babyface champs regularly defending their titles at the same time. You could differentiate Reigns' run from Cena's by having Reigns be involved in more ongoing feuds for his title as opposed to Cena's run where he's facing a new guy every week.

 

Anyway I think that would have gone a long way towards taking some heat off him as people wouldn't be able to say he's being pushed too hard since he wouldn't be world champ, but he's still be able to keep winning and looking strong. The end game in my version of events would be the ultimate re-match against Brock. Basically I'd see Reigns IC title run as following a similar formula to The Ultimate Warrior's run leading up to WM 6 (though I'd probably have Reigns drop the IC title before WM 32 rather than do a champion vs. champion thing).

 

I think ultimately this would let them tell a more traditional story of "guy gets a shot at the title but comes up short b/c he wasn't ready so he spends the next year getting stronger for the rematch". I think the IC title would have been a really good vehicle for telling that story while keeping him strong, but instead they've done the typical WWE thing where they'll just have him wander aimlessly all year and then decide at the last minute to retcon the last year and build him up again (like when they tried to sell the idea that Cena had had a terrible year following his loss to the Rock when there was really nothing unusual about it)

[Loss]

He's still connecting to the audiences they really want to reach: women, kids and their parents. He's still selling a ton of merchandise. If the smarkety smarky don't like him I don't think it's going to matter. It hasn't kept John Cena from being the ace.

 

Cena didn't assume the throne with the backlash already there, though. And is Roman really selling a lot of merch? I haven't read anything to that effect. Cena was far more over in 2004-2005 than Reigns is now.

[Strummer]

Question if Reigns doesn't get hurt last September and as planned goes over Rollins in their feud and presumably helps the babyfaces get rid of the Authority at Survivor Series, does the crowd still turn on him at the Rumble? That's still factoring in Bryan returning. He just comes back from injury in January, squashes a few mid card geeks, then can't beat Big Show in multiple matches and then wins the Rumble like nothing and is supposed to be the guy all of a sudden.

[goc]

 

He's still connecting to the audiences they really want to reach: women, kids and their parents. He's still selling a ton of merchandise. If the smarkety smarky don't like him I don't think it's going to matter. It hasn't kept John Cena from being the ace.

 

Cena didn't assume the throne with the backlash already there, though. And is Roman really selling a lot of merch? I haven't read anything to that effect Cena was far more over in 2004-2005 than Reigns is now.

 

I think the days of the fanbase unifying behind one dude are kind of over. Bryan had it but I still think there would have been a backlash coming if he'd have held on to the belt for very long after Mania 30. And yes, from what I've seen Reigns is #2 behind Cena as far as merchandise sales.

 

Cena's backlash started almost the minute he showed up on Raw from Smackdown so it's not like it took very long and it's not like it influenced them to change direction.

[Loss]

Can I see a link? I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I want to see the source for that. I'll also add that when WWE was pointing out how Bryan sold no merch, he was also #2 behind Cena, but it was by a 5:1 margin. So being number two alone may not mean much.

 

Also, if that was the case, wouldn't there be more guys up and down the card getting a split reaction? If a top babyface that most people like can't exist anymore, then there's nothing interesting about wrestling. It doesn't say anything good about the performers or the people in power when they can't manipulate audiences into rallying behind someone.

[Russellmania]

Question if Reigns doesn't get hurt last September and as planned goes over Rollins in their feud and presumably helps the babyfaces get rid of the Authority at Survivor Series, does the crowd still turn on him at the Rumble? That's still factoring in Bryan returning. He just comes back from injury in January, squashes a few mid card geeks, then can't beat Big Show in multiple matches and then wins the Rumble like nothing and is supposed to be the guy all of a sudden.

I think they'd still have faced the wrath of Bryan fans because ultimately it was Reigns getting pushed over the "more deserving" Bryan that really made people turn on him. So yeah if Reigns hadn't been injured then he'd probably have been more effectively built up before winning the Rumble, but I think fans would have still been pissed that Reigns won over Bryan.

 

Now if they did the smart thing and just kept Bryan off TV until after the Rumble then I think it would have completely changed the dynamic. Consider that in 2014 when fans turned on the Rumble match after realizing Bryan wasn't coming out, Reigns is the guy most of that crowd latched on to as the consolation prize over Batista. If fans at this year's rumble went into it thinking that Bryan was still not cleared to wrestle then i truly believe they'd have gotten behind Reigns. Maybe not to the level that they were behind Bryan, but I don't think they'd have really had a reason to turn on Reigns en masse.

[Loss]

I think that's spot on.

[LariatMMBOPPO]

Now if they did the smart thing and just kept Bryan off TV until after the Rumble then I think it would have completely changed the dynamic. Consider that in 2014 when fans turned on the Rumble match after realizing Bryan wasn't coming out, Reigns is the guy most of that crowd latched on to as the consolation prize over Batista. If fans at this year's rumble went into it thinking that Bryan was still not cleared to wrestle then i truly believe they'd have gotten behind Reigns. Maybe not to the level that they were behind Bryan, but I don't think they'd have really had a reason to turn on Reigns en masse.

 

 

People don't go to wrestling shows to watch wrestling as a "sport" anymore. Fans know they're watching a performance and treat it as watch. Reigns was only cheered because he wasn't Batista.

 

Also, if that was the case, wouldn't there be more guys up and down the card getting a split reaction? If a top babyface that most people like can't exist anymore, then there's nothing interesting about wrestling. It doesn't say anything good about the performers or the people in power when they can't manipulate audiences into rallying behind someone.

Times change. Cena's been on top for 10 years and has had a divided reaction the entire time. Fans now view main eventers who were pushed without "deserving it" as being handpicked and thus must suck. In any other generation, Reigns would probably have no issue with getting over just based on performance alone. Fans are post-modern in the sense they know they're trying to be manipulated, resist and the company resorts to booking using annoying reverse psychology.

 

Daniel Bryan was viewed as being held down. The company had the people who the audience knew had power backstage demean and belittle him. This makes the audience think this is what Triple H and company really think of him and rally behind him. Not to say they didn't botch up his feud with Orton. He even said in his book it was a misguided attempt to protect him.

[Loss]

This is a bigger topic but if all perceptions are just what they are and can't be changed, there is zero point in discussing it the way we do because it has no performance value. It's just there. I just can't believe that's true. I still think it can be done. Wrestling that can't revive a dead crowd, outsmart people who think they're on to everything or change perceptions of those involved is just masturbation.

[Russellmania]

 

Now if they did the smart thing and just kept Bryan off TV until after the Rumble then I think it would have completely changed the dynamic. Consider that in 2014 when fans turned on the Rumble match after realizing Bryan wasn't coming out, Reigns is the guy most of that crowd latched on to as the consolation prize over Batista. If fans at this year's rumble went into it thinking that Bryan was still not cleared to wrestle then i truly believe they'd have gotten behind Reigns. Maybe not to the level that they were behind Bryan, but I don't think they'd have really had a reason to turn on Reigns en masse.

 

 

People don't go to wrestling shows to watch wrestling as a "sport" anymore. Fans know they're watching a performance and treat it as watch. Reigns was only cheered because he wasn't Batista.

 

Also, if that was the case, wouldn't there be more guys up and down the card getting a split reaction? If a top babyface that most people like can't exist anymore, then there's nothing interesting about wrestling. It doesn't say anything good about the performers or the people in power when they can't manipulate audiences into rallying behind someone.

Times change. Cena's been on top for 10 years and has had a divided reaction the entire time. Fans now view main eventers who were pushed without "deserving it" as being handpicked and thus must suck. In any other generation, Reigns would probably have no issue with getting over just based on performance alone. Fans are post-modern in the sense they know they're trying to be manipulated, resist and the company resorts to booking using annoying reverse psychology.

 

Daniel Bryan was viewed as being held down. The company had the people who the audience knew had power backstage demean and belittle him. This makes the audience think this is what Triple H and company really think of him and rally behind him. Not to say they didn't botch up his feud with Orton. He even said in his book it was a misguided attempt to protect him.

 

The bolded is patently false. Bryan was clearly the top guy at the time, but most fans genuinely liked Roman who was still in the Shield and all 3 Shield guys were still on fire. Reigns was still very much seen as the cool upstart babyface...this was way before anyone started turning on him (which was nearly a year later)

[BBscout]

IMO the belt should have been put on Reigns at Money in the Bank 2014 when he had natural momentum and then should have saw him drop it to Lesnar a month later at Summerslam to build toward an eventual rematch. Picture that Mania match having happened at Summerslam and then the subsequent ride to see him get his rematch after having the belt snatched so quick. A loss so quick wouldn't have hurt him because it's fucking Lesnar.

 

Remember that battle royal with him and Rusev as the final two. That was great stuff.

[LariatMMBOPPO]

 

The bolded is patently false. Bryan was clearly the top guy at the time, but most fans genuinely liked Roman who was still in the Shield and all 3 Shield guys were still on fire. Reigns was still very much seen as the cool upstart babyface...this was way before anyone started turning on him (which was nearly a year later)

 

 

Nope. The entire match was being shit on when they realized Bryan wasn't coming out and Batista was going to win. Reigns just happened to be the last guy in and their last hope at seeing Batista lose.

 

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1ahvy0_royal-rumble-match-2014_sport

 

[Slasher]

Actually Reigns started getting turned on when they realized Dean Ambrose was a better babyface challenger to Seth Rollins and by extension, the Authority. Seeing Ambrose get jerked around while leaving Reigns in bubble wrap is what got the fans to realize it was Reigns or bust. Then over Bryan? Oh hell no.

[Slasher]

But to Loss's point, I think the only way we are getting that universally cheered babyface is if the company did the wacky thing and...y'know...listened to the fans. The fans have been telling them who they want to see. Most of the guys though? Either pushed half heartedly or not at all. This is part of the war against the fans. If they stopped that shit and just tried to invest that same willpower they have been using with Cena and Reigns and Triple H on one of the people the fans have actually advocated for....just try it out and see how it works out.

[Loss]

I think great wrestling manipulates fans into wanting what the promoter is willing to give them, then delivers it. Just listening to fans and giving them what they ask for sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. It's been a long time since we have seen the former. I still believe it can happen, though. The key is to create their own Daniel Bryan, which they could do with Cesaro, but I'm not sure I trust them to pull that off at this stage.

[Slasher]

I get that but I think right now the important thing is to rebuild a little bit of trust on both sides. The WWE has spent too much time in recent years swinging their dicks at the fans. I think if the WWE showed an open mindness towards saying "You guys are not total idiots. This guy that you like does deserve something" the fans would be more pliable towards going along with other plans in addition to that. There is nothing wrong with having Ace 1A and 1B and each being represented by both sides. Now I do recognize the risk of giving fans too much power but I think if you strap them in at the beginning of the ride for someone's push-a rise from debut to main events, it will placate them while you do your own thing as the company. If say you debut Finn Balor on the main roster and the fans are invested, instead of cutting him off to test his resolve, just keep pushing him like he IS a chosen one, all the while pushing your guy as his rival or whatever who is YOUR chosen one and I think it could work.

[Slasher]

Also I think Cesaro is more of a fans' guy than a company guy. He has kept his fans through thick and thin. He is not the guy I would use as your example. A guy that fits more is someone like Rusev. A guy who was a complete WWE creation, got over as a heel, and now is nearly at a point where the fans would accept a babyface turn...without the indy credentials that has kept the hardcore fans into guys like Owens or Rollins/Ambrose or Cesaro.

[Loss]

Fair point.