|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 10:27:24 GMT -5
Off topic Loving the fact that roman reigns and the divas are topping the threads around here!!!!! Go Roman and Divas!! That's pretty much the case always. But more right now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 8:36:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 10:28:11 GMT -5
Ugh. Roman Reigns just isn't ready for the spot that he's being propelled into. Yes, he has improved. No, he's not awful. However, he's not ready to headline WrestleMania at this stage in his career and WWE abysmally forcing it doesn't help one bit. Who is ready? Bryan, sure. Rollins, maybe. But after that? Ziggler? Cesaro? Ambrose? Wyatt? I'm a huge fan of all those guys, as I know a good portion of this forum (and wrestling fans in general) are. But those guys are hardly any better prepared to step into the position Reigns is about to.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Charisma on Feb 25, 2015 10:28:15 GMT -5
I think people don't want someone who just shrugs off his opponents as if they're nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Feb 25, 2015 10:31:01 GMT -5
From the tears and outrage every time Daniel Bryan loses, it's obvious that the complainers want a babyface who wins every time. It just has to be a babyface who has been "buried" previously. Ah, this gimmick of yours is so constantly refreshing. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that no matter who it is, I think people don't want someone who just shrugs off his opponents as if they're nothing. The other point I was trying to make was that we don't know what he wants specifically and to assume so is kind of a problem around here. Grouping everyone into the same category is insulting. Crying about anyone being insulting whilst simultaneously insulting people who have different opinions as "gimmicks" is hilariously hypocritical. It really makes the high-horsing look like... Well, like a gimmick.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 8:36:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 10:33:46 GMT -5
From the tears and outrage every time Daniel Bryan loses, it's obvious that the complainers want a babyface who wins every time. It just has to be a babyface who has been "buried" previously. Ah, this gimmick of yours is so constantly refreshing. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that no matter who it is, I think people don't want someone who just shrugs off his opponents as if they're nothing. The other point I was trying to make was that we don't know what he wants specifically and to assume so is kind of a problem around here. Grouping everyone into the same category is insulting. To be fair, Austin used to shrug his opponents of as if they were nothing. It just doesn't work well for Cena or Reigns because their characters are so different. I like Reigns, but I'll admit his booking recently has been bizarre, which is probably why some are finding it hard to get behind him.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 10:35:04 GMT -5
Ah, this gimmick of yours is so constantly refreshing. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that no matter who it is, I think people don't want someone who just shrugs off his opponents as if they're nothing. The other point I was trying to make was that we don't know what he wants specifically and to assume so is kind of a problem around here. Grouping everyone into the same category is insulting. Crying about anyone being insulting whilst simultaneously insulting people who have different opinions as "gimmicks" is hilariously hypocritical. It really makes the high-horsing look like... Well, like a gimmick. It's funny how you go out of your way to criticize people who have differing opinions on this board. If somebody doesn't like something and speaks their mind, they're told to "go cry in their basement" or are considered whining and such. I don't think that I insulted you but if I did, I apologize. I'm not on here to talk bad about anyone or talk down to them. If that's your thing, then cool. If I've done anything like that, then I apologize because that's not who I am. I don't have a gimmick on here, except maybe "guy who really likes Paige" but there's a ton like that. I'm just a wrestling fan who likes to talk to other wrestling fans about our views and opinions, without being looked down upon.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 10:36:03 GMT -5
Ah, this gimmick of yours is so constantly refreshing. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that no matter who it is, I think people don't want someone who just shrugs off his opponents as if they're nothing. The other point I was trying to make was that we don't know what he wants specifically and to assume so is kind of a problem around here. Grouping everyone into the same category is insulting. To be fair, Austin used to shrug his opponents of as if they were nothing. It just doesn't work well for Cena or Reigns because their characters are so different. I like Reigns, but I'll admit his booking recently has been bizarre, which is probably why some are finding it hard to get behind him. I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Most of his opponents looked like threats. I do like that you admit the second part. It has been odd.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 8:36:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 10:46:17 GMT -5
To be fair, Austin used to shrug his opponents of as if they were nothing. It just doesn't work well for Cena or Reigns because their characters are so different. I like Reigns, but I'll admit his booking recently has been bizarre, which is probably why some are finding it hard to get behind him. I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Most of his opponents looked like threats. I do like that you admit the second part. It has been odd. I think it was part of Austin's gimmick, and it worked for him because he had his "I don't give a damn who you are, I'ma whip your ass" shtick. I don't think it could work for many guys, but it worked well for Diesel for a couple months there before he left for WCW. Neither Cena or Reigns have a "too cool to care" quality, John in particular is like an all American goody goody, so their laughing off opponents comes off as school boy childish rather than badass like Austin's. But I try not to let bad booking like that throw me off guys if I see talent in them. I've been a Reigns fan since I saw him. I could tell he was going to be the next big thing, so it's easier for me to buy him now. What I do hate though is that after WM, we'll either get "Brock carried him" and/or "Not even Brock could carry him" comments by his haters. I still think it's going to be a while before the hate dies down, if at all. It's like with John, who constantly delivers epic matches, yet so many people look at him and say "he's the worst ever", which to me is just preposterous.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 8:36:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 10:49:57 GMT -5
I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Most of his opponents looked like threats. I do like that you admit the second part. It has been odd. I think it was part of Austin's gimmick, and it worked for him because he had his "I don't give a damn who you are, I'ma whip your ass" shtick. I don't think it could work for many guys, but it worked well for Diesel for a couple months there before he left for WCW. Neither Cena or Reigns have a "too cool to care" quality, John in particular is like an all American goody goody, so their laughing off opponents comes off as school boy childish rather than badass like Austin's. But I try not to let bad booking like that throw me off guys if I see talent in them. I've been a Reigns fan since I saw him. I could tell he was going to be the next big thing, so it's easier for me to buy him now. What I do hate though is that after WM, we'll either get "Brock carried him" and/or "Not even Brock could carry him" comments by his haters. I still think it's going to be a while before the hate dies down, if at all. It's like with John, who constantly delivers epic matches, yet so many people look at him and say "he's the worst ever", which to me is just preposterous. The whole concept is still one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Feb 25, 2015 10:52:29 GMT -5
I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Have you ever seen Austin's 1997-2000 work?
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Feb 25, 2015 10:58:51 GMT -5
To be fair, Austin used to shrug his opponents of as if they were nothing. It just doesn't work well for Cena or Reigns because their characters are so different. I like Reigns, but I'll admit his booking recently has been bizarre, which is probably why some are finding it hard to get behind him. I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Most of his opponents looked like threats. I do like that you admit the second part. It has been odd. This gives me a chance to note something else that is creative/company related, and not superstar related... For ALL the talent WWE has right now. How many of them have been built up to potentially headline WM? Realistically? I'm talking newer, younger talent. WWE has put so many eggs in the Orton/Cena basket over the past 7 years, or so, this is the problem that was to inevitably come. We should have 6-8 new potential headliners for WM right now. We get one. Roman Reigns. People are split on the attitude era, but if we think about it...those 4-6 years were so stacked with talent, that even mid-card mainstays could pop into the occasional WWE Title match, and be a believable threat. This is the first time we've had that much talent to look forward too, since that time period...and what do we get? Kane/Show/Rollins vs. Bryan/Reigns or some variation of. I want Reigns, or whoever is champ, to throw down the gauntlet, and have someone like Luke Harper come out, and you believably think dude may just manage to get the title off them. Just because he hasn't headlined yet, doesn't mean he couldn't... Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Wyatt, Bryan and Ziggler. Those should be the mainstays right now. Stick any one of them in the Title picture at any time. Like the AE had Taker, HHH, Rock, Austin, and Mankind. Then you have a good 12-15 superstars on top of that, not even counting NXT, that could be utilized once in a while, that just aren't. This is why the IC Title needs prestige brought back to it. Where people actually WANT to carry it, and value carrying it. It's a stepping stone to that inevitable WWE Title shot/run. Make people a threat. Tell stories. Build people up. It's like WWE truly believes their fans have absolutely no memory, and no ATTENTION SPAN.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 10:58:57 GMT -5
I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Have you ever seen Austin's 1997-2000 work? I mean, as @cabbageconkers said, he did it as part of his gimmick. However, I always felt that Undertaker, Bret Hart, Rock (post Nation), Triple H, Kane and a few others came off as actual threats to him. Austin was a badass who wouldn't back down, but was in legit trouble when facing these guys.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Feb 25, 2015 11:05:48 GMT -5
Have you ever seen Austin's 1997-2000 work? I mean, as @cabbageconkers said, he did it as part of his gimmick. However, I always felt that Undertaker, Bret Hart, Rock (post Nation), Triple H, Kane and a few others came off as actual threats to him. Austin was a badass who wouldn't back down, but was in legit trouble when facing these guys. I'm not sure how old you were at the time to have maybe seen the heels as bigger threats, but after he won the title, the Austin character wasn't fazed by anything -- largely because of Steve's paranoid politicking to ensure he never looked weak. If anyone looked like a threat against him, it was the strength of their own character rather than anything he gave them. Austinwinslol was the Cenawinslol of yesteryear.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 11:08:59 GMT -5
I mean, as @cabbageconkers said, he did it as part of his gimmick. However, I always felt that Undertaker, Bret Hart, Rock (post Nation), Triple H, Kane and a few others came off as actual threats to him. Austin was a badass who wouldn't back down, but was in legit trouble when facing these guys. I'm not sure how old you were at the time to have maybe seen the heels as bigger threats, but after he won the title, the Austin character wasn't fazed by anything -- largely because of Steve's paranoid politicking to ensure he never looked weak. If anyone looked like a threat against him, it was the strength of their own character rather than anything he gave them. Austinwinslol was the Cenawinslol of yesteryear. Well, at the time I was between 7 and 10 so maybe I remember it differently than someone who had more knowledge of the business back then. However, even as a kid, I knew that Rikishi and Dude Love for example, weren't threats. I bought into those other guys, and even looking back at it, I can see that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 25, 2024 8:36:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 11:10:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Feb 25, 2015 11:22:27 GMT -5
I don't think used to shrug them off completely. Most of his opponents looked like threats. I do like that you admit the second part. It has been odd. This gives me a chance to note something else that is creative/company related, and not superstar related... For ALL the talent WWE has right now. How many of them have been built up to potentially headline WM? Realistically? I'm talking newer, younger talent. WWE has put so many eggs in the Orton/Cena basket over the past 7 years, or so, this is the problem that was to inevitably come. We should have 6-8 new potential headliners for WM right now. We get one. Roman Reigns. People are split on the attitude era, but if we think about it...those 4-6 years were so stacked with talent, that even mid-card mainstays could pop into the occasional WWE Title match, and be a believable threat. This is the first time we've had that much talent to look forward too, since that time period...and what do we get? Kane/Show/Rollins vs. Bryan/Reigns or some variation of. I want Reigns, or whoever is champ, to throw down the gauntlet, and have someone like Luke Harper come out, and you believably think dude may just manage to get the title off them. Just because he hasn't headlined yet, doesn't mean he couldn't... Reigns, Rollins, Ambrose, Wyatt, Bryan and Ziggler. Those should be the mainstays right now. Stick any one of them in the Title picture at any time. Like the AE had Taker, HHH, Rock, Austin, and Mankind. Then you have a good 12-15 superstars on top of that, not even counting NXT, that could be utilized once in a while, that just aren't. This is why the IC Title needs prestige brought back to it. Where people actually WANT to carry it, and value carrying it. It's a stepping stone to that inevitable WWE Title shot/run. Make people a threat. Tell stories. Build people up. It's like WWE truly believes their fans have absolutely no memory, and no ATTENTION SPAN. This is a great post that should not be overlooked.
|
|
|
Post by Red Dragon on Feb 25, 2015 11:28:38 GMT -5
I don't mind Reigns. I don't understand those who complain that WWE aren't creating any new main eventers but also complain when they push Reigns. There'll be complaints no matter what. It's harsh to blame Reigns when he's done everything he can. I'd rather see what he can do. I did a full write up here: reddragonwrestling.blogspot.co.uk/
|
|
|
Post by McBlake on Feb 25, 2015 11:41:16 GMT -5
People were hating on Reigns long before he won the Rumble, so we can throw the idea of him only being hated because he's in the main event of Wrestlemania out the window.
At this point it's more just blinded by hate imo.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Feb 25, 2015 12:07:18 GMT -5
For ALL the talent WWE has right now. How many of them have been built up to potentially headline WM? Realistically? I'm talking newer, younger talent. WWE has put so many eggs in the Orton/Cena basket over the past 7 years, or so, this is the problem that was to inevitably come. We should have 6-8 new potential headliners for WM right now. We get one. Roman Reigns. People are split on the attitude era, but if we think about it...those 4-6 years were so stacked with talent, that even mid-card mainstays could pop into the occasional WWE Title match, and be a believable threat. WWE has quite a few guys now that can be in the occasional title match, but for a WrestleMania title match... It's Cena, Lesnar, Bryan, Reigns, Orton, Rollins (maybe). But the attitude era wasn't teeming with a bunch of different WM main event guys either. You had: WM14: Michaels vs Austin WM15: Austin vs Rock WM2000: Rock vs HHH vs Big Show vs Foley WMX7: Austin vs Rock And really, none of those years (except maybe HHH at X7) ever had other guys on the roster that you could slot into the main event to make it bigger. The roster had a lot more starpower year round, but the real top spots were as few then as now. Most of those years, it was obvious after Survivor Series what the next Mania main event would be, although WM2000 threw a curveball with the 4-way.
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Feb 25, 2015 13:22:42 GMT -5
For ALL the talent WWE has right now. How many of them have been built up to potentially headline WM? Realistically? I'm talking newer, younger talent. WWE has put so many eggs in the Orton/Cena basket over the past 7 years, or so, this is the problem that was to inevitably come. We should have 6-8 new potential headliners for WM right now. We get one. Roman Reigns. People are split on the attitude era, but if we think about it...those 4-6 years were so stacked with talent, that even mid-card mainstays could pop into the occasional WWE Title match, and be a believable threat. WWE has quite a few guys now that can be in the occasional title match, but for a WrestleMania title match... It's Cena, Lesnar, Bryan, Reigns, Orton, Rollins (maybe). But the attitude era wasn't teeming with a bunch of different WM main event guys either. You had: WM14: Michaels vs Austin WM15: Austin vs Rock WM2000: Rock vs HHH vs Big Show vs Foley WMX7: Austin vs Rock And really, none of those years (except maybe HHH at X7) ever had other guys on the roster that you could slot into the main event to make it bigger. The roster had a lot more starpower year round, but the real top spots were as few then as now. Most of those years, it was obvious after Survivor Series what the next Mania main event would be, although WM2000 threw a curveball with the 4-way. But that's what I was saying with the mainstays. You have those few that are above where anyone else on the roster is, or could be. Wyatt - Taker Ambrose - Foley Rollins - Austin Reigns - HHH Ziggler - HBK Bryan - Rock/Guerrero Everyone else falls in line somewhere, and when I say threat, I don't mean Luke Harper's going to main event Wrestlemania. I mean if Reigns is WWE WHC and throws down a challenge on RAW, for the title (something else I think needs to happen once in a while)...and someone comes out. Put on a 4-5 star main event on RAW for the Title. Make it believable that Reigns could lose the match. Get people talking about the Champ, and the show, again. You have those guys mentioned above as the main event/main stays, not counting Orton/Cena/Sheamus. Now add in: BNB Rusev Cesaro Big E Mizdow Rowan Fandango Goldust Swagger Kofi Harper Miz Truth Ryback Sin Cara Stardust Titus O Neil Any of those characters could be IC Champ, or challenge for the WWE WHC at some point, realistically, with the PROPER storytelling. But half of them don't even appear on a given RAW, or SD, weekly. That's a serious problem.
|
|