Seej Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 Much like last year, I think this show will over-deliver. Vinnie Mac always has something up his sleeve, and I don't expect this time to be any different. My predictions.... Total Divas beat Team B.A.D. and Blonde The Usos beat The Dudleyz Kalisto retains vs Ryback and goes on to feud with newly heeled Sin Cara ATGMBR is won by either Mark Henry or Bray Wyatt New Day over LON. Supposedly, New Day will have a fourth member on their team. AJ Styles beats Y2J, rather decisively Becky beats Charlotte and Sasha for the Divas title. Owens retains the IC title in the seven man ladder match Dean Ambrose beats Brock Lesnar in the street fight, with possible Wyatt interference. Shane beats Taker in HIAC. Cena, Austin, and maybe even the Mean Street Posse interfere. Reigns beats HHH to become the WWE World Champion, with help from his former Shield brothers Dean Ambrose and a returning Seth Rollins. This leads to a Shield vs Balor Club feud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russellmania Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 on paper I feel like it's totally possible that the show itself is pretty good as i think the big 3 matches have the potential to be really good and the undercard has enough talent to make something out of nothing. But in terms of build, hype and any sort of cohesive booking this is one of the worst Wrestlemanias ever. Anything good that happens on this show will be in spite of the shitty booking not because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 Remember a few weeks ago when Shane McMahon was announced as Undertaker's opponent everybody said "just give it a couple weeks, there's no way that's going to be an actual match." Well, here we are. You also have Sin Cara and Zack Ryder competing for a singles title and Kalisto will be defending his singles title on the PPV proper. This entire build has been so random, it sounds more like a kid's create-a-PPV from a video game. I'm oddly intrigued? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 I wonder why they opted not to have a special referee and corner people for HHH-Reigns, which was supposedly the original plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 Batista said no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaedmc Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 I wonder why they opted not to have a special referee and corner people for HHH-Reigns, which was supposedly the original plan. I thought that was Scott Hall's fantasy booking plan, and it made so much sense that of course they didn't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 I don't know why they thought Batista was the best and only choice to be the ref and scrapped the idea after he turned them down. But as unenthused as the fans might be for the match the focus needs to be on just the two and not a guy they would just wait to see play into the finish. As much as I would dig the Shield vs Balor Club from a inring standpoint I would actually hate the reunion if they did it anytime soon. Rollins went out feuding with Reigns and his biggest archrival is Dean Ambrose. Rollins has not redeemed himself enough for the Shield to make sense even if Rollins helped Reigns win. Why wouldn't the guy want that belt back instead? He didn't even lose it fairly. They need to explain that first before dealing with even teasing a reunion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 So Hunter did an interview with CBS sports and is still pushing the vocal minority/heel crowd talking point with Reigns. I know we say this religiously about this company but they just can't help but sound clueless. They still don't get it I understand they can't say anything else to the media but I think internally they believe it. Even Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Ewiak Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 So Hunter did an interview with CBS sports and is still pushing the vocal minority/heel crowd talking point with Reigns. I know we say this religiously about this company but they just can't help but sound clueless. They still don't get it I understand they can't say anything else to the media but I think internally they believe it. Even Hunter I think in one measure it is true. At a house show in Green Bay or Amarillo, Reigns is fine. Hell, even at these smarky RAW shows, I'm sure Reigns is still one of the best selling merch guys. Now, of course, his booking has sucked, but this is literally the worst possible cities for the road to WM when it comes to Reigns. #politicalhit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted March 29, 2016 Report Share Posted March 29, 2016 Pretty much any house show report you read will say Reigns got an overwhelmingly positive reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo Slice Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I should be shocked that they're going off house show reaction and not the more public reaction, but I'm not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Ewiak Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I should be shocked that they're going off house show reaction and not the more public reaction, but I'm not. Because the public reaction doesn't line up with the sold out crowds at those RAW's and PPV's. If Roman was truly hated, people wouldn't come to the show anymore. The RAW and PPV shows will always be more hardcore, especially now wrestling has become a 'nerd' thing. I think the WWE has largely accepted that. As long as people keep on buying overpriced tickets and experiences to those events, they can boo Roman all they want because the money still goes into Vince's pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I should be shocked that they're going off house show reaction and not the more public reaction, but I'm not. If it was my decision I'd cater more to the house show crowd too. The TV/PPV audience is the hardcore audience that has proven they're going to give WWE money regardless even if it's for totally illogical reasons like "hey let's go to Raw to boo a babyface we don't like, chant stuff WWE will hate and hijack the show!" while spurning house shows because "nothing important happens." These are the people who will spend hours on message boards and podcasts talking about how bad WWE is yet bite your head off the moment you suggest they stop giving WWE their money. The house show audience is made up a lot more of families, which is the audience WWE wants, and casual fans who might not even watch that much but decide to go to a show because it's in town and something to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo Slice Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 My point is that they are only going to be able to do that for so long. I understand there are more house shows than live TV shows and merchandise plays a big part, but they really do risk falling even further down now that that "vocal minority" bullshit is becoming more and more of a majority. Those types of fans aren't going to go away, and as we've seen it's only grown in the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slasher Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I should be shocked that they're going off house show reaction and not the more public reaction, but I'm not. Because the public reaction doesn't line up with the sold out crowds at those RAW's and PPV's. If Roman was truly hated, people wouldn't come to the show anymore. The RAW and PPV shows will always be more hardcore, especially now wrestling has become a 'nerd' thing. I think the WWE has largely accepted that. As long as people keep on buying overpriced tickets and experiences to those events, they can boo Roman all they want because the money still goes into Vince's pocket. They were still making money in the Triple H Raw franchise ace era and no one would say that was a good time to be a WWE fan, period. But see, the WWE won. It is the brand itself now. People go because it is the WWE. In that respect yeah they don't have to give a fuck who they put on top because people are gonna come. But don't try to sell the idea that Reigns is popular and at all a draw even just on the house show level. The fans show up to have a good time. If its Reigns they push out the curtains he will get cheers but I suspect the same would be true of just about anyone who is a babyface and meant to be taken seriously as a player. Reigns has value for sure but citing house show reports means exactly diddly squat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 My point is that they are only going to be able to do that for so long. I understand there are more house shows than live TV shows and merchandise plays a big part, but they really do risk falling even further down now that that "vocal minority" bullshit is becoming more and more of a majority. Those types of fans aren't going to go away, and as we've seen it's only grown in the last few years. Then what's the risk? They didn't decide to abandon ship when the Cena hate was at it's highest point. I think it's equal parts the "vocal minority" audience has grown and the casual audience has shrunk. If you have a guy who seems to connect with the audience you're losing, keep going with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeg Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I should be shocked that they're going off house show reaction and not the more public reaction, but I'm not. Because the public reaction doesn't line up with the sold out crowds at those RAW's and PPV's. If Roman was truly hated, people wouldn't come to the show anymore. The RAW and PPV shows will always be more hardcore, especially now wrestling has become a 'nerd' thing. I think the WWE has largely accepted that. As long as people keep on buying overpriced tickets and experiences to those events, they can boo Roman all they want because the money still goes into Vince's pocket. Gotta disagree. WWE only runs cities a few times a year. Its like the circus or some other special event. If it comes to your town and its your thing, you are going regardless of how shitty a show it is or who is on top. I go, although I admit it is harder these days finding people to go with than 15 years ago. This is in large part because it will be months to years before they come back. This is not like the old territory days where its a loop of the same 5 to 10 towns every week or two. Secondly WWE is not selling out. I can only talk about when WWE comes to Washington DC. I have never been to a sold out WWE show ever. Recent years, I was able to call somebody two days before RAW and get tickets. Scaplers were giving the tickets away. Any other sports tickets in town are tough to come by. Also tickets for WWE are downright affordable compared to other sporting events, cheaper than any other professional sport or entertainment act out there. The WWE has to be hurting. Their stage and the Titantron block out about 5,000 seats at the Verizon center, skybox tickets (which are almost ungettable for concerts and hockey) go for 20 bucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 That they can push Roman Reigns without going out of business isn't really proof that they get anything positive out of pushing Roman Reigns at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlet-Left Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 That they can push Roman Reigns without going out of business isn't really proof that they get anything positive out of pushing Roman Reigns at this point.Could they not replace him with Dean? Is Roman such a hit with the casual fans that it'd hurt them to trade places? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmmnx Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 My issue with Roman winning the title and staying baby face is who does he feud with after Mania? They don't have any credible heels besides HHH. Turning Roman and having Dean chase until Cena and Rollins are back seems like the best plan to me. They still have Roman/Brock 2 as a big match, but there's no way the fans will side with Roman there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchistxx Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 John Cena got the exact same reactions. Imagine if a year or two into his solo push they heard the cascading boos and just pulled the plug and decided it wasn't working. Imagine if they had heard the boos and decided they might as well cull the whole idea of him as a top guy, like some people on this board want them to do to Roman Reigns. Anyone WWE pushes as the company ace is going to get some heat if they are developed in house rather than an internet favorite doing workrate matches who is perceived as a great worker who has paid dues. That is the nature of WWE crowds on TV and PPV. Roman Reigns continues to get huge reactions. On Raw he is booed massively by the snarky hardcores, cheered massively by the kids and the females - just about everyone in the arena is reacting to him, in some way. In 2016, that is being over, and it is fucking hard to achieve. He is over at house shows. He sells merchandise. He has got reactions as both a face and heel. Virtually nobody in this era is going to get a universally positive reaction. Daniel Bryan is the only one that springs to mind. The WWE would be far more worried about people just sitting on their hands silent and bored through every segment than they will be about a ton of negative heat. I've seen very little evidence Dean Ambrose is more over, more talented, better in the ring, a better promo or a better character than Roman Reigns. He is also much less credible as the ace. WWE should stick to their guns, just like they did with John Cena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmmnx Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I've seen no evidence that Roman is anywhere close to being as over with kids as Cena was/is. Cena's most negative reactions were about 50/50 cheers and boos. Roman's reactions have been 20/80. The fact that he's over in front of a few thousand people in a half empty building on a house show doesn't impress me. His character needs tweaking. I don't think he has the charisma or likeability to be anything other than a Golderg style ass kicker. The sympathetic baby face stuff they're trying with him just doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlet-Left Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 I've seen very little evidence Dean Ambrose is more over, more talented, better in the ring, a better promo or a better character than Roman Reigns. He is also much less credible as the ace. I'm not saying he is, I'm just asking from a business stand-point, does WWE have anything to lose by going with him over Reigns? Does Reigns have a significant fan-base that would stop buying merchandise, stop attending live events or stop tuning in if he were turned heel or sent a few spots down the card? If not, wouldn't it be better to have a guy, in Dean, who wouldn't have to struggle against such a negative backlash. When I watch Reigns getting booed (whilst he's going through his babyface spots that are supposed to imply he's being fired up by the crowd or the atmosphere) I just come away feeling dejected. Even in terms of the cartoon logic of the WWE, why wouldn't Roman just tell these fans to shut their gobs (for cheering pieces of work like Triple H)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerva Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 Another match (Ryback vs Kalisto) is being moved to the pre-show. but the good news is that the battle royal is now on the main show which is good because at this rate they would have needed a 35 minute Rock promo to fill up the 4 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timbo Slice Posted March 30, 2016 Report Share Posted March 30, 2016 Loss' point is the one that sticks with me, as my point is that if you take fan growth as an indication of buying into acts over time, the Cena comparisons don't hold water. He was a complete exception because he had the type of personality that still lent itself to guys buying in even if they didn't like the push. Reigns has not proven that so far, and the growth of fans who don't buy it is much greater than the casual fans who do. In a sense, they're cannibalizing their own growth by sticking to antiquated processes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts