Roman / Brock vs. Sasha / Bayley

[KobASHi]

 

 

Last and most importantly: Sasha-Bailey is telling a feminist story, in a year in which the rights and roles of women were heavily contested worldwide. Im sure that many of you roll your eyes at that notion, especially in light of what the Divas Revolution has become. So goes the Bro Internet. But what was achieved in this is far rarer and much more impressive than two heavyweight hosses having a slobberknocker - even one as great as Reigns-Lesnar.

I don't want to be trivial, but do you really add a snow-flake for the potential social or political significance of a given match?

 

Should I be marking Iron Sheik vs. Sgt. Slaughter down for its jingoism and xenophobia? Should I be marking the Dudes with Attitude angle up in 1990 for its commitment to equal rights (for black guys, JYD, for both South Americans and Giants, Gigante, for the disabled, Orndorff, and for the mentally challenged, Rick Steiner)?

 

We also don't seem to do this for other historically significant matches ...

 

Do you give Hogan vs. Andre an extra snow flake for the booking behind it?

 

Do you give extra significance to the Ron Simmons title win?

 

I am being serious on this.

Yes, I'd add something if it really played into an overall move forward. If it sold you onto the story and the match then add all the stars you want. It's subjective to the viewer.

[GOTNW]

I found pretty much all NXT Women Title Matches to be overrated and wouldn't consider any of them as serious MOTYCs. Really don't see how Brock/Roman is a near-perfect/all time great match but I definitely enjoyed it more than Sasha/Bayley.

[Parties]

 

Last and most importantly: Sasha-Bailey is telling a feminist story, in a year in which the rights and roles of women were heavily contested worldwide. I’m sure that many of you roll your eyes at that notion, especially in light of what the Divas Revolution has become. So goes the Bro Internet. But what was achieved in this is far rarer and much more impressive than two heavyweight hosses having a slobberknocker - even one as great as Reigns-Lesnar.

 

I don't want to be trivial, but do you really add a snow-flake for the potential social or political significance of a given match?

 

Should I be marking Iron Sheik vs. Sgt. Slaughter down for its jingoism and xenophobia? Should I be marking the Dudes with Attitude angle up in 1990 for its commitment to equal rights (for black guys, JYD, for both South Americans and Giants, Gigante, for the disabled, Orndorff, and for the mentally challenged, Rick Steiner)?

 

We also don't seem to do this for other historically significant matches ...

 

Do you give Hogan vs. Andre an extra snow flake for the booking behind it?

 

Do you give extra significance to the Ron Simmons title win?

 

I am being serious on this.

 

 

I don't add a snowflake, because star ratings are pretty dumb and uninteresting to me. Talk about stuff that gets overstated in the evaluation of a match.

 

Look: I'm not saying that two women having a MOTY changes western civ. But the fact that two women did have the MOTY is unprecedented (unless you really like prime Joshi more than every other amazing thing that was happening in wrestling during its peaks) and does mean something, especially in the context of current events.

 

Sheik-Slaughter's still brilliant, and I don't think the rah-rah jingoism changes that. With Sasha-Bailey, we're talking about politics improving a match, not hurting it. Hogan-Andre is a lousy match and pretty overrated angle that's been recontextualized in history by benefit of the Pontiac crowd. So actually yes, we absolutely do give extra props to matches that are historically relevant just for their size/scope. I'm not a huge Simmons fan, but his title win was cool, and to this day the fact that it happened in Baltimore is all the more noteworthy. The crowd reaction speaks to the significance of a black world champion, even if by '92 that accolade meant far less than it would have to a mid-80s Butch Reed.

[JerryvonKramer]

It's cool if you judge matches on things like that. Just wanted a bit of elaboration.

 

I tend not to and look almost exclusively at bell to bell when judging matches. I'm low on stuff like Race vs. Flair from Starrcade or Flair vs. Sting, Clash 1 that have been rated highly in the past for their significance, just as I'm high on stuff like Flair vs. Garvin that have been criticised in the past for poor booking.

 

It's just how I tend to think about matches.

[Grimmas]

I just think Bayley-Sasha is a better match.

 

If Brock-Roman had a proper great finish then maybe it would had pushed it past it, but it didn't. The finish was shit.

 

Also, I enjoyed the story of Bayley-Sasha better. The crowd was better. The finish was better. All around a better match.

[KobASHi]

Yeah I rate matches in this scale

 

*load of shit

*didn't do it for me

*meh

*it was alright that

*really, really enjoyed it

*tell other people to watch it, fucking loved that.

[Parties]

I think the finish makes the match better in some ways because the work had gotten to the point where the crowd was finally behind Reigns.

 

OK, but how does a Rollins win benefit that? Wouldn't the payoff be Reigns winning over the crowd with his prowess and then... you know, winning the match? To me the whole thing felt too much like proxy-HHH (Rollins) getting a main event Wrestlemania title win by simultaneously outsmarting proxy-Rock (Reigns) and proxy-Dana White (Lesnar). All of which led to more horrible garbage with the Authority as the company's top stars. Cerebral Assassin strikes again.

[Matt D]

The money is in the chase? He should have just won by Summerslam.

[goc]

The money is in the chase? He should have just won by Summerslam.

at WrestleMania. FTFY

 

I voted Roman/Brock despite the fact that I really really hated the finish and thought it did a lot more damage than good. I'm in the Parv camp of not down grading a match for a bad/not clean finish unless it just breaks it's own rules like the Butch Reed/Dick Slater match from the Mid-South set that got shit on hard for being a No DQ match that ended in....a DQ.

[JerryvonKramer]

A good example of matches that were down-graded at the time because of finishes the crowd didn't like would be the Flair vs. Luger matches, especially the blood stoppage one.

 

That would be another match I'd point to where the finish is not good, but it doesn't really bring me down on the match.

[DMJ]

Voted Sasha/Bayley. I'm not even a regular NXT viewer, but that match legit had me tearing up. A large part of that was the production around it, the video packages, the build, etc. that didn't happen between bells, but I don't think its wrong to include that stuff when thinking of a true MOTY list.

 

I will say that before I put a final list together, I'll likely rewatch Lesnar/Reigns. The one and only time I watched it from beginning to end was the night of...and by that point, I was pretty inebriated. I remember enjoying it, but I don't remember enjoying it as the best match I'd ever seen or seen all year or anything.

 

Anyone else rate the Cena/Lesnar/Rollins triple-threat from Royal Rumble 2015 highly? Looking at my database, I had that at 4.5. I know Austin and others raved about it on their podcasts too (Austin may have called it the best triple threat ever).

[Coffey]

Best Mania main event of all time. Probably the best Mania match of all time.

 

That is some really high praise. You think that match is better than Rock/Austin at X-Seven for a main event, or better than Bret/Austin for a match? Better than Savage/Steamboat?

 

I'm used to having a different opinion than many others on here but I have never felt a disconnect this badly before. I'm going to go re-watch it right now.

[Loss]

My issue with Lesnar-Reigns is that they stuck with that match defiantly, despite bad crowd reactions and despite Reigns not getting over. So if they were so set on that match, they should have had the courage to give the match a winner -- either Roman Reigns or Brock Lesnar. They used the briefcase as a get out of jail free card because they wanted to get the belt off of Brock without him getting beaten. It's enough to put a stink on the entire viewing experience, even though it was a fantastic match. I still think Brock should have won and kept the belt at home for months at a time yet again, with the difference being that they'd actually talk about him constantly even though he wasn't around. It's not like the championship has meant more with Rollins being around all year.

[goc]

 

Best Mania main event of all time. Probably the best Mania match of all time.

 

That is some really high praise. You think that match is better than Rock/Austin at X-Seven for a main event, or better than Bret/Austin for a match? Better than Savage/Steamboat?

 

I'm used to having a different opinion than many others on here but I have never felt a disconnect this badly before. I'm going to go re-watch it right now.

 

If it had actually had a finish I would feel comfortable saying I thought it was the best Mania match ever. As it is I actually think it compares favorably to Rock/Austin as that had a really shitty finish also. I wouldn't put it over Bret/Austin though. Never actually been that big a fan of Savage/Steamboat, at least not compared to the hype.

[Coffey]

So, I just re-watched it & it was fun - there was a lot of bomb throwing. It was basically Brock just demolishing Reigns but Reigns never giving up. Then Brock makes a mistake, Reigns goes to capitalize... and doesn't win. Brock still kicks out. 'Cause you can't kill the Beast, apparently. Then Reigns eats another F-5. It was nothing but finisher trading & kicking out of finishes then the Money in the Bank Cash-in, where Seth comes out, they do more finisher stuff & then the match ends.

 

Literally the second move of the match was an F-5. Which I realize is what Brock has been doing lately, showing how he's dominating people & what he did to John Cena at the SummerSlam before.. but this match is not even a MOTYC for me, let alone greatest Wrestlemania match ever. That's way too much hyperbole for me.

 

The ring apron Clothesline was BRUTAL though. I legit said out loud "oh fuck" when he cold-cocked him there. That was great.

 

Again, it was fun. There was a story there. They didn't really get to finish their story. I felt like I was just starting to get wrapped up in the match then Seth came out. Maybe that was the point, so I would be pissed at Seth for not letting me see that match end. Maybe we'll get Brock/Roman again this year to a conclusion. But just that match alone, I feel like I wanted more and it didn't get there. We didn't really get a payoff to Roman smiling either.

[pol]

A match like the one Roman and Brock had that night ending on a fuck finish is like an epic symphony ending on a wrong note. I can't ignore that regardless of how great the stuff that came before was.

[C.S.]

I'll be honest: I didn't particularly enjoy Brock vs. Roman at the time, and I say that as someone who loved the finish. However, I appreciate it more in retrospect as a brutal brawl with blood and great facial reactions from Reigns. Nowhere close to a MOTY for me by any stretch, but it was fun.

 

Sasha vs. Bayley was much more enjoyable for me. Some might say it was a forced epic with a manufactured feel-good narrative, but the emotional aspect worked for me and I loved the Four Horsewomen "moment" at the end. That being said, I thought Charlotte vs. Sasha vs. Bayley vs. Becky was the true MOTY for the women, and I generally hate 3- and 4-way matches.

[Ricky Jackson]

I loved Brock vs Reigns but of the two it will be the forgotten one. Kind of already is outside of uber hardcore places like this

[Bierschwale]

Making fans forget about that match being incredible before the cash-in is part of the political hit.

[Jimmy James]

I don't know if there's any way to tell for sure, but at the time, I thought that the crowd absolutely was coming alive for Roman in his comeback at the end. This really was one time where the hostile crowd added to the match- Brock was booked as this completely unstoppable beast to the point where it felt like a crowd at the Colosseum cheering for the lions to go over the Christians clean. (that said, I have no idea how the hell the crowd popping huge for the heel run-in works in this bad analogy)

 

I think people have mentioned this before, but WWE never really sold this match as an incredible classic, and this wasn't put together to be a self-conscious classic like your 30-minute HBK match, which makes me love it even more.

[Jimmy James]

Making fans forget about that match being incredible before the cash-in is part of the political hit.

Most of the audience who doesn't post on wrestling boards, I think, like Roman at this point, but yeah, this is one of the only places where I've seen that match acknowledged for being as good as it was. Most other places, Roman Reigns matches devolve into contests for whoever can post that Roman is gassed first.

[goc]

 

Making fans forget about that match being incredible before the cash-in is part of the political hit.

Most of the audience who doesn't post on wrestling boards, I think, like Roman at this point, but yeah, this is one of the only places where I've seen that match acknowledged for being as good as it was. Most other places, Roman Reigns matches devolve into contests for whoever can post that Roman is gassed first.

 

What a shitty time for "smart" fans that they mistake selling for being gassed because they think that the idiots who work 100 miles an hour and never stay down for more than 5 seconds before they get to their next move are the "good workers."

[Alucard]

As a huge Sasha fan and not a bayley fan, I had gone in to that thinking Sasha would retain and then she lost but the match was so good I couldn't even be mad at the result. I was totally sucked in to the drama of the match and invested all the way through so it's got my vote. Thought the finish was absolutely spectacular and definitely one to remember. I liked Lesnar/Reigns a lot but wouldn't call it the best WM match ever, it didn't strike me as all that much different from some of Lesnar's other matches overall. Both top matches of the year for sure.

[Dylan Waco]

My brothers and I spent tonight watching Regins/Brock and the Sasha trilogy (v. Becky and the two Bayley matches). We barely talked about the matches while watching them and went around the room ranking them when it was over.

 

Dustin ranked the matches in this order from top-to-bottom

 

1. Sasha v. Bayley Brooklyn

2. Sasha v. Bayley Iron Man

3. Brock v. Reigns

4. Sasha v. Becky

 

Devon went

 

1. Sasha v. Bayley Iron Man

2. Sasha v. Becky

3. Sasha v. Bayley Brooklyn

4. Brock v. Reigns

 

I went

 

1. Sasha v. Bayley Iron Man

2. Sasha v. Bayley Brooklyn

3. Sasha v. Becky

4. Brock v. Reigns

 

To me what makes the Iron Man match the best is the psychology of the match and the fact both characters were their truest selves. Sasha was the bratty entitlement queen, who is legitimately skilled, but more than willing to cheat, get vicious, mock, and even troll a child. Bayley is the ultimate babyface, from her one legged hopscotch into the ring, to the way she sells nervousness at every moment, to her timing of comebacks. So much of what they did in the match was either a direct callback spot to the previous match, or something that played off of other themes or spots that had come up in previous NXT women's matches. It was a match that rewarded the viewer for following along week-to-week, or even special-to-special, and in the end it felt like both a coronation of Bayley as the new face of the brand, and the perfect way for the old face to exit the stage. Yes, it was ambitious match, but it was one that I thought lived up to it's goal which is something that seems to happen much less often than it should these days.

 

I will say in an ideal world the circumstances of the Brooklyn and Iron Man matches would have been combined, i.e. the Brooklyn show comes last, they have the blow off in that big arena, and only one kayfabe busting post-match ceremony. I will also freely admit that both the first Bayley v. Sasha match and the Sasha v. Becky match had better execution, though the sloppiness of the Iron Man is much milder on rewatch than it felt in real time (and even then I didn't think it really hurt the match). Devoid of any context I could see an argument that the best of the bunch is actually Becky v. Sasha which had great dueling armwork, excellent build, and a very fitting finish. That said I don't think the heel v. face dynamic was nearly as strongly defined, I felt it could have used a little more time, and it clearly felt the least "main event" of the bunch.

 

I have nothing bad to say about Reigns v. Lesnar at all. It's a brilliant match in a lot of ways. Watching it back it makes me laugh that anyone could think Reigns was being carried, as his bumping, selling, and timing were every bit as important as Brock's and if someone is going to make a comment about anyone looking gassed in the match, Reigns wouldn't be the first choice. It felt like a big time match, they laid in their shots, the story told was excellent, the build to the big Roman comeback, the way Lesnar sold during that comeback, et. all great. I don't even mind the finish at all. That said, it was very much "Brock has another great Brock Match." It did not seem distinct from the other Brock classics, though I would argue it's the second best after the original Cena return match. In that sense it was very predictable. I also thought the F5 spot at the beginning was by far the most questionable spot in any of the four matches I watched with my brother's tonight as Brock didn't even go for a cover and instead just sort of walked around after the fact. I'm not saying it didn't fit the moment, but from a psychology perspective it's less than ideal. I do wonder if Brock's bleeding has less effect now because he's done it several times so it feels less special, but I don't really think that effected my view of the match.

 

In the end the biggest difference is one of emotional investment. I am not completely invested in Becky, but I am very invested in Bayley and Sasha in large part because of the way they play their roles and invest themselves in their characters. Brock? Eh, he's awesome, he has a real vibe to him, I'm pumped to see him live in the coming months, but he's not a CHARACTER I really give two fucks about. I don't know if it's that he's not around enough, or what but I just don't care that much about Brock the wrestling personality. Similarly, I am arguably Reigns biggest advocate when it comes to in ring work, but as a character he was already severely damaged to the point of absurdity back then. It's only gotten worse since which doesn't help. Granted Sasha hasn't exactly been presented well on the main roster, but within the universe in which those matches took place she was a goddess.

 

All of this said, I think all four matches are REALLY close. I think any of the four could be fourth and any of the four could be first and it wouldn't look strange or ridiculous to me at all. There are a couple of other WWE matches I should probably rewatch, but I doubt very seriously that I would rate anything in the WWE this year above those four matches.

[Jingus]

The money is in the chase?

Not in the WWE, it ain't. This is a company with a fairly consistent sixty-year history of doing its best business when they've got a strong babyface champion on top. It's funny that the people who always insist that "the money is in the chase, dammit!" ignore the fact that the most money ever made by an American promotion was usually done with non-chasey storylines.

 

Anyone else rate the Cena/Lesnar/Rollins triple-threat from Royal Rumble 2015 highly?

Yep. That's one reason I'm raising an eyebrow at all this "best Mania match ever" talk (I can easily think of at least a dozen Wrestlemania bouts I liked better, maybe lots more than that given more time) when I didn't even think it's been Brock's best match this year.

 

And since when did we all turn on the finish? At the time of the show, the entire internet was raving about how brilliant the Rollins cash-in was and how it saved the match (if not the whole show). This is literally the first time I've seen a bunch of people complaining about it.