Would you change the WM Main Event?

With the furore over the reaction over the Royal Rumble match being hijacked by various Daniel Bryan chants and Roman being booed despite supposedly being "Face" due to Bryan & some terrible match booking

Alot of people believe that Reigns isn't ready for the title match due to various reasons...

Do WWE bow to the fan reaction and place Bryan in or hope that the crowd just stop being smarky and push on with Roman

So with all that involved would you change the 6 month rumored plan of Brock vs Roman at WM 31?

If so how?

No the crowd just need to stop being selfish and get behind Reigns.

Bryan's time will come again. Regins time is now.

I think the crowd have to give him a chance. If he stinks the joint out then you dont get behind him, but there is a catalogue of matches to be built and this is his chance to be a main event player. The "hes not ready now" argument is a problem, because if they dump on him now and ruin it then he may never get to a level they want. And I think its a dangerous precedent for a fair weather and at times immature crowd to constantly just get their way

I wouldn't put Bryan in the Main Event, though I think putting Rollins into the match wouldn't be a bad idea.

I have a feeling the Fast Lane match between Bryan and Reigns ends with Rollins laying both men out, leading to either a triple threat or a fatal fourway for the title at Mania.

NickisBHAFC wrote:No the crowd just need to stop being selfish and get behind Reigns.

Bryan's time will come again. Regins time is now.

Hello Vince

Yes, they should. Reigns is not ready and the crowd want Bryan. Why go against it? Reigns is young, so has time on his side. Turn him heel and let him pay his dues and more importantly develop.

liverbnz wrote:Yes, they should. Reigns is not ready and the crowd want Bryan. Why go against it? Reigns is young, so has time on his side. Turn him heel and let him pay his dues and more importantly develop.

i'll tell you why they should go against it and its simple.

if Vince changes the main event AGAIN because of some tosspot fans who cry when they dont get what they want, then what happens next??

you cant let fans dictate to this level.
you'd have the same fan favourite as champion all the time, no heel champions, wheres the fun, and whats the point in that.

I'd keep it as it is and show the fans that he is the one making the decisions.

I think you are horribley misreading the situation. It has nothing to do with being a heel or a face or the type of fans and everything to do with Romain Reigns not connecting with the fans in the way that Vince has obviously perceived.

The current champion is (supposedly) a heel, and I don't hear many (tosspots) crying! I also think the fans would be perfectly fine with Rollins, a heel, main eventing WM. He's done his time in the 'lower leagues' of professional wrestling, and developmental. He has developed in his time in the Shield and has flourished as a heel on his own since last June - despite his moveset being more suited to a face IMO. He has some good/great matches under his belt, is a very good talker and is probably now the most natural heel on the roster. Reigns has a long way to go to catch up on that.

In him they see a man that has so far done very little in his career to date, especially as an individual talent and are now revolting at the thought of him main eventing the company's showcase event. He doesn't deserve it, plain and simple and the fans have every right to voice their opinion on that. When given the chance to show what he could do in the Royal Rumble, he lay in the corner for the majority. That hardly screams main event does it?

'I'd keep it as it is and show the fans that he is the one making the decisions.' And what? And see your buyrate for your top PPV possibley suffer? A reduction in your Network subscriptions? (They can only give away free months for so long). The fans are not employees or children of Vince, they don't require disciplining. They are customers. If you don't give them what they want, they'll go elsewhere.

I think you've misinterpreted it. He was saying that if they only pushed the guys the crowd are firmly behind THEN there wouldnt be anymore heel champions. He was actually speaking in support of having a heel champion.

exactly Samo,

the same thing happened last year when Batista won the rumble.

the fans caused a stink and Bryan was put in the match, and it looks like the same could happen this year because the fans "chosen one" hasnt been picked.

what happens next year if the current flavour of the month doesnt win??
do they start yelling again??
does vince change it again??

it would no longer be worth watching as you would know the outcome before hand.

why cant Reigns main event??
6 months ago people were screaming for him and claiming him be the breakout star of the shield while Bryan was out injured.

Had Bryan not returned there would be no booing of Reigns.
this is nothing but the fans throwing their toys out of the pram to get what they want.

let the writers go with what they feel best.

You have both misinterpreted me now. I was pointing out that the fans would be fine with a heel champion - they just do not want Reigns for the reasons said above. I think the fans would have readily accepted Rollins or Orton winning the Rumble without the reaction they gave Reigns. Heck if Reigns had of actually done something noteworthy in the Rumble he mightn't have got the reaction he did.

Whether Reigns was the breakout star of the Shield or not is debatable (I actually thought Ambrose was coming out of the Shield looking the one best positioned to go to the top) but coming out of a stable strong and being ready for main eventing WM are worlds apart - and he has done very little in the intervening period to bridge that gap.

No one is saying they wouldnt be fine with a heel champion. We're saying you wouldnt get one if the WWE only pushed the guys who the fans loved the most.

And I'm saying it isn't a case of pushing guys that people love the most - just those people accept. I.e. Guys that have earned their spots.

Think what Liver is trying to say is that they wouldn't be in the position of having to change the main event of Mania if what they did in the first place is put the right people in the match..

People seem to be focussed on pushing this whole fan thing onto the Bryan angle when that isn't actually the case. I don't for one minute think this has to do with Bryan, it's more that his actual character is the easiest to get behind and push in order to revolt.

Whilst there are arguably those who believe Bryan should be in the main event and are only annoyed at Reigns because he took his spot...the vast majority who have voiced there displeasure have done so because of who WWE have chosen to put in that spot.

Reigns may have been hot 6 months ago...but the fact is he has been out of the spotlight, away from the scene and since then plenty of others have stepped up and shown to both those within the WWE and the fans that they are as capable, if not more so, than Reigns. I also think another worry is that fans are seeing how Reigns is being booked in terms of his promo's, the endings to matches (like the great comeback moments...even this week on Raw, absent for large periods then hits a few moves and it's over) and they are seeing parallels to what they have already been made accustomed to and voiced displeasure in and that is John Cena.

If you were to rate WWE wrestlers in the past 12 months in the following catergories:

Promo'ing
Growth/Improvement
Wrestling
In Ring Psychology
Selling Ability
Fan Connection (be it heel or face)

Then I would hazard most would not find place for Roman Reigns in there Top 5..perhaps even Top 8..

And that's the problem, fans see that...fans know that...so when he is pushed to the top of the pyramid it will of course result in fans showing there resentment in the choice.

It's all well and good saying creative should stick to there guns if they feel they know what they are doing, but the fact is they have shown little in the past to suggest they do. Not only that but plenty on here talk as if WWE is wrestling still and it's not. It is a PRODUCT...a product which is aimed at an audience, an audience which WWE want to be as big as possible because profit is it's most important aim. Thus they do have a responsibilty to there fans to deliver a product they want to see...if that's Bryan at the top then so be it.

You can't have it both ways, if you market WWE as a product then you have to sell it as that. That means you cater to the fans needs and wants. If Nike sent out a survey with pictures of two different styles of trainers and asked its consumers to choose which is best.....then went and made the one with the least response...then we as consumers would snub it. It's no different here!

I think the VAST majority of fans are fine with Reigns being the guy. Its only the vocal minority IWC and 'smarks' that arent. We saw it when Reigns won the Rumble. Philly has always been a smark city because of ECW, but Reigns got a very positive reception when RAW was back to normal.

The problem is the crowd are starting to follow Philly and he's getting the "Cena Effect" Small kids - Yay - Adults - Boo

Personally would go for Lesnar - Reigns - Bryan - Rollins...

Have a real heel in the match, the crowd favourite in Bryan and the two other who get mixed reaction. It would be likely to be a better match as well as dampen the negative reaction to Roman from the crowd.

I don't think the question is Would you change the WM Main Event, it should be Would you change the WM Main Event winner? Because whether it's Reigns v Lesnar 1 on 1, Triple Threat or Fatal Four Way, you'd have to think Reigns would still be nailed on to win the title and we'd be exactly where we are now with the 'mixed' crowd reactions.

So who would you have WIN the title at Wrestlemania?

I'm not convinced that Brock goes.  I just think he's been smart in letting WWE know he has options.  But he's not getting any younger, he has a medical history and he doesn't like being hit in the face.  

So, I see him threatening going to UFC, but I wouldn't be making that move if I were him.  He could be beaten in the first minute of his first fight.  Or he could get himself another relatively cushy WWE contract.  For me, its a no-brainer.

If I keep Brock, I keep the title on him.  But, I turn him face.  I understand that WWE is about to announce a sponsorship deal with TapouT and I think he can become the legitimate face of that and start to shift some merchandise.  Also, that sponsorship should go a long way to pay his wages.

Maybe, I'm just wishful thinking here.  Because a WWE without Brock (based on his recent appearances) is a poorer and less interesting promotion for me.

Prometheus wrote:I'm not convinced that Brock goes.  I just think he's been smart in letting WWE know he has options.  But he's not getting any younger, he has a medical history and he doesn't like being hit in the face.  

So, I see him threatening going to UFC, but I wouldn't be making that move if I were him.  He could be beaten in the first minute of his first fight.  Or he could get himself another relatively cushy WWE contract.  For me, its a no-brainer.

If I keep Brock, I keep the title on him.  But, I turn him face.  I understand that WWE is about to announce a sponsorship deal with TapouT and I think he can become the legitimate face of that and start to shift some merchandise.  Also, that sponsorship should go a long way to pay his wages.

Maybe, I'm just wishful thinking here.  Because a WWE without Brock (based on his recent appearances) is a poorer and less interesting promotion for me.

Interesting point but I believe that Lesnar is allowed to have his own sponsors (Punk moaned about it) which means that any tap out deal would be going to him not WWE if he was to advertise them.

Adam D wrote:

Prometheus wrote:I'm not convinced that Brock goes.  I just think he's been smart in letting WWE know he has options.  But he's not getting any younger, he has a medical history and he doesn't like being hit in the face.  

So, I see him threatening going to UFC, but I wouldn't be making that move if I were him.  He could be beaten in the first minute of his first fight.  Or he could get himself another relatively cushy WWE contract.  For me, its a no-brainer.

If I keep Brock, I keep the title on him.  But, I turn him face.  I understand that WWE is about to announce a sponsorship deal with TapouT and I think he can become the legitimate face of that and start to shift some merchandise.  Also, that sponsorship should go a long way to pay his wages.

Maybe, I'm just wishful thinking here.  Because a WWE without Brock (based on his recent appearances) is a poorer and less interesting promotion for me.

Interesting point but I believe that Lesnar is allowed to have his own sponsors (Punk moaned about it) which means that any tap out deal would be going to him not WWE if he was to advertise them.

Yes.  But, I'm thinking that contract is re-negotiated.  And part of that can be "buying out" the clause that has Brock with his own sponsors.  

I've no idea what level of sponsorship Brock currently gets.  But, even if we say it is 1M.  And let us say that Brock's WWE contract is 5M.  Simply put Brock could be offered a new contract for 6M.  

The Reebok deal (which left TapouT out in the cold) is reportedly worth $70M over 6 years.  I guess like any deal it will have some performance metrics in there, but whatever it is that's a large chunk of change.  

Obviously TapouT is a lot smaller than Reebok.  I've no idea what their current turnover is.  But let us say that they pay WWE half of what Reebok is paying UFC.  So, 5.5M per year.  Well, this pretty much pays for Brock's contract with TapouT exclusivity and if you make sales of merchandise linked to that the upside for Brock could potentially be pretty big I think.

Just pure speculation, but this news has been making me wonder what could be done.  And if you look at Brock's career, I think it is arguable that he is an athlete who knows the value of his body and uses that to maximise his income, so this could appeal to his business head.

EDIT: Who the hell are Brock's sponsors anyway?  I must have seen him come out to the ring a whole load of times without being able to tell you who's branding he's wearing.  If they aren't clothing related, maybe he can somehow continue to wear their logos, while being in TapouT gear.  Just musing....

2nd EDIT: I'll put it another way Adam. If WWE can't get this clause taken out of Brock's contract then they have to make the decision, keep Brock or take the TapouT money. Because they may not be able to have both.

Take the case that WWE and TapouT announce this great deal. Then have Brock walk out at WM wearing Nike shorts and gloves. That would certainly not go down well.

So maybe the fact that this deal hasn't been announced yet and Brocks' contract still seems up in the air are linked. Who knows ?!

If Brock Lesnar went back to UFC there isn't a chance he could beat Cain Valesquez, Junior Dos Santos or Fabricio Werdum, the top 3 ranked Heavyweights. He's already lost to 2 of those guys. If he's happy to go back and simply be a top 10 ranked Heavyweight then more power to him but surely he must know given his past health problems and age that it'd be a monumental ask to stand toe to toe with those guys. Going back there would be a bigger risk than Punk going there in my eyes.

I think he'd get laughed at if he signed for Bellator (The TNA of the MMA world), so signing an extension with the WWE and walking out of WM31 still as Champion would be awesome.

owen10ozzy wrote:If you were to rate WWE wrestlers in the past 12 months in the following catergories:

Promo'ing
Growth/Improvement
Wrestling
In Ring Psychology
Selling Ability
Fan Connection (be it heel or face)

Then I would hazard most would not find place for Roman Reigns in there Top 5..perhaps even Top 8..

Depends where you get your "most people" from, and whether you trust them not to have skewed their thinking because they now have this negative feeling towards Reigns. I don't trust people, SCSA taught me so.

I think he'd be top 5 for Growth/Improvement, In Ring Psychology (I actually really like the way he presents himself) and Fan Connection. This does take into account that you have to be able to judge this on where people are on the card, as Goldust probably wins a few of those yet wouldnt be near a main event. I'd only be putting Bryan in 3 of those too, btw.

I also dispute the "this isnt about Bryan thing". Its not entirely, but Reigns probably doesnt get booed if Bryan isn't in the Rumble at all.

I'm also ruddy sick of anyone saying people should "pay their dues". Because Roman Reigns probably didnt wrestle until the Shield existed, and should thank those guys from the indies that he even got over in the Shield cos he had no talent anyway.

Indy bumming does my nut. There are routes you can take, but earning your dues doesnt mean ROH loved you

I shall throw out alternative question now then on that basis. You're going to hate this Dolph and probably rant

If Roman was not the Rock's cousin do you think he would be as high up the card as he is now?

Yes. Because he is the classic Vince prototype and looks great. I don't think the WWE have any loyalty to The Rock in terms of pushing his family members in order to keep him happy, and I don't think The Rock would expect that either. Cousin or not, Reigns would still be getting pushed purely because of his look.

What a difference a year makes - Reigns was hot as hell in the 2014 Rumble, it was cool to like him and everyone wanted him to win. His character has barely changed in 12 months and everyone hates him. I feel for the guy tbh.

Yeah, cousin isnt exactly some super tight link. That family is all over WWE, like saying the Usos are only champs because Rikishi is a soon to be hall of famer

'Paying his dues' is not about working the indies. It's about having a level of experience gained through working matches and building stories and most of all learning with a variety of opponents. Whether that's in the indies or WWE is not that important, although nowadays WWE would be preferable. So in other words, not raw as hell.

The fans are seeing a guy that has done barely anything as a singles wrestler all of sudden catapulted to the top of the roster. He was hot last year because the Shield covered his weaknesses and accentuated his strengths. His weakness are now exposed and for whatever reason he has not developed. hence his reactions.

But he has developed, he actually has shown himself up to be reasonably good in the ring, his promos are always far better than the hipster critics let it be thought and his dues have come in success in some big feuds as part of The Shield and some solo too.

For once, I agree a bit with HHH. Being placed as the good guy is not a good thing for a wrestler. You have to be believed to be given a setback by management to get support.

Reigns isnt raw as hell. In what many were calling a perfectly balanced push back in October-ish, where it was pretty sure even then he would face Lesnar at Mania, people were saying WWE had done well to pit him against Orton, needed to build him into the Rumble win then establish him before Lesnar. Anyone expecting magic promos from a Bryan/Reigns feud isnt right in the head.

Before Bryan came back, Reigns was favourite to win and no one really minded. No one brought up many better names either. The one guy who had a story where it could work, Ziggler, was dismissed by a good amount of people on here. It really ended up being Reigns or Orton in the months before Bryan returned. Ambrose had taken heavy amount of losses and people were unconvinced that Wyatt's ascent would continue.

He has had no noteworthy fueds or matches as a singles competitor and his promos are good to middling at best - whether that's because he's scripted or not I don't know.

The warning signs were there from that Orton match at SummerSlam. He did ok, but doing ok is not good enough. He treaded water until his injury and I think the WWE were doing things right with him until then but he probably needed some consistent high quality showings at PPVs to consolidate but they didn't come through a combination of injury, his awful promos while out injured that got no reaction and then his lacklustre Rumble appearance.

And you right it is harder to be a face, it always has been. You have to prove yourself to the fans and Reigns as a singles wrestler is only about half way there right now.

So, what he needs is, as someone with a bit of momentum and rising popularity, probably a Rumble win, a decent feud and then the title match?

And still, all that aside, the only people ahead of him who were possibles for the position by those criteria are Ziggler and Orton, maybe Ambrose but his jobbing is really not helpful. Orton, who most people bemoan not being a fresh main eventer, has been on fire and I would love him to go up against Lesnar, but no one really sees Orton having another title run yet as a face.

I'm not an avid viewer but whenever I watch Reigns he appears laboured and a little slow in the ring - Yes his spear is devastating but the superman punch is just awful. Whether he deserves the push is one thing (I don't think he does because of his time out, he needed more in ring time after his injury, a few bigger feuds before maybe booking him for the RR win next year?) but the main worry I have as a viewer is what a match between Reigns and Lesnar will be like - Yes Lesnar is awesome and carries a lot of people through matches but should he really have to do that to the guy who is gonna supposedly be the next big thing?

Bryan is a safe pair of hands, he made WM30 more memorable and had the two best matches of the night(I'm not including the streak match out of respect for Chris), Rollins has shown in the triple threat match he can survive in the ME scene

Lesnar needs to lose the belt without being pinned, best way to do that is in a multi man match - If that is Reigns as new champ then so be it - I am still holding out for a Reigns win followed by Lesnar destroying him and Bryan and Rollins cashing in - It doesn't give that warm fluffy ending that WM normally goes for but it would throw Reigns and Rollins into a feud and then Bryan can go into a program with Brock

The problem is one of WWE's making. They initially encourage the fan interaction, the 'What' chants that then helped bury so many heel promos, the 'Yes' chants and then the kayfabe crowd invasion for Daniel Bryan, fans now believe they can alter the course of the main event at Mania etc and once you give that power over it's nigh on impossible to reclaim it.

If they had put off Bryans return until after the Rumble, Reigns wouldnt have got nearly as negative a reception as he did.

Hero wrote:The problem is one of WWE's making. They initially encourage the fan interaction, the 'What' chants that then helped bury so many heel promos, the 'Yes' chants and then the kayfabe crowd invasion for Daniel Bryan, fans now believe they can alter the course of the main event at Mania etc and once you give that power over it's nigh on impossible to reclaim it.

Things would be so much easier if WWE didn't have to keep those pesky people paying for the product happy, huh?

Having said that I think you go a bit too far, a bit too fast for me to keep up above.

I think one of the big issues was that WWE left the Bryan story up in the air, without an adequate resolution. He came back and it was not addressed about where he fits into the world title scene. Fans know that he was stripped of the belt and that he wasn't beaten, so why not address it with a clear resolve? They could have even made a great angle out of it. HHH could have told Bryan no way is he getting a rematch on his watch. He was a B+ player and ultimately his body let him down. That his only options were to win the Rumble, win Money in the Bank or kiss his ass. He could have then put a bounty on Bryan being eliminated at the Rumble. It could have been sold as this was his first chance gone. It makes the MitB more interesting. And if he loses that, does he turn heel? Even then, what kind of match could he be offered, it could be a Hell in a Cell match with Brock, that HHH wants to completely break Bryan.

Their issue with Reigns. I really think that for all the talk of his lack of progress, bad promos, etc. The thing that has killed him is that the Rumble was so badly booked. If he'd have put 12 men out like he did the year before and was a dominant player, I don't think there'd be anywhere near as much trouble. This seems particularly poor when the champ is Brock and you need someone built up so big to give the impression that he can take the belt off the champ. No-one deserved to win that Rumble, and that is the hole that fans are attempting to fill.

i dont get people who keep banging on about the superman punch looking awful, because its not even a finisher.

is it any more awful than the 5 knuckle shuffle??

hulks big boot??

HHH's knee to the face?

bret harts inverted atomic drop and 2nd rope elbow.

these are all set up moves, not finishers, the same as the superman punch.

i wonder how many people could stand there and take that awful move if it was legitimately thrown into their face??


people also keep go on about him "not paying his dues"

how many dues did Lesnar take before he was made champion the first time round??
none, he was there less than a year before he was given his chance to run with the ball.

Ian2307 wrote:i dont get people who keep banging on about the superman punch looking awful, because its not even a finisher.

is it any more awful than the 5 knuckle shuffle??

hulks big boot??

HHH's knee to the face?

bret harts inverted atomic drop and 2nd rope elbow.

these are all set up moves, not finishers, the same as the superman punch.

i wonder how many people could stand there and take that awful move if it was legitimately thrown into their face??

It is a closed hand punch which I believe is illegal but still like the KO punch by Big Show is allowed when it suits WWE. Set up moves are fine but it is the delivery of the move that troubles me - I'm just not believing it's effectiveness, much like the 5 knuckle shuffle or big boot - A beast like Reigns should have high impact aggressive moves, the punch is neither

Paul Mac 6CW wrote:

Ian2307 wrote:i dont get people who keep banging on about the superman punch looking awful, because its not even a finisher.

is it any more awful than the 5 knuckle shuffle??

hulks big boot??

HHH's knee to the face?

bret harts inverted atomic drop and 2nd rope elbow.

these are all set up moves, not finishers, the same as the superman punch.

i wonder how many people could stand there and take that awful move if it was legitimately thrown into their face??

It is a closed hand punch which I believe is illegal but still like the KO punch by Big Show is allowed when it suits WWE. Set up moves are fine but it is the delivery of the move that troubles me  - I'm just not believing it's effectiveness, much like the 5 knuckle shuffle or big boot - A beast like Reigns should have high impact aggressive moves, the punch is neither

all punches are closed hand punches though

Reigns was getting booed before he was out injured in the Autumn. His reaction can not be blamed solely on Daniel Bryan.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:So, what he needs is, as someone with a bit of momentum and rising popularity, probably a Rumble win, a decent feud and then the title match?

And still, all that aside, the only people ahead of him who were possibles for the position by those criteria are Ziggler and Orton, maybe Ambrose but his jobbing is really not helpful. Orton, who most people bemoan not being a fresh main eventer, has been on fire and I would love him to go up against Lesnar, but no one really sees Orton having another title run yet as a face.

He needs more than a few months run with a decent fued. Rollins has had a great run since June, with plebty of defeats along the way and I would say he's probably closest of all the Shield members - but only because the roster is so lacking in depth right now. Reigns hasn't even got close to that body of work behind him and he is much newer to this business than Rollins and therefore a lot more to learn.

There was no alternative because WWE had quite clearly, from at least a year back if not more, put all their eggs in the Roman Reigns basket. Aside from Daniel Bryan, the only one was Orton as you say. I think him vs Lesnar would def be fresh and the fans would love it. For me, Orton came out the better of the SummerSlam match despite the loss and even trying to put Roman over - but we should expect this given he is the better performer of the 2.

Paul Mac 6CW wrote: A beast like Reigns should have high impact aggressive moves, the punch is neither

Disagree entirely. I think the Superman Punch is definitely high impact, and is a spectacle. Its the kind of move the casual fans love, it makes them go 'Oh Poopie that was really cool!'

Samo wrote:

Paul Mac 6CW wrote: A beast like Reigns should have high impact aggressive moves, the punch is neither

Disagree entirely.  I think the Superman Punch is definitely high impact, and is a spectacle.  Its the kind of move the casual fans love, it makes them go 'Oh Poopie that was really cool!'

I'm a casual fan and I think it's awful

Ian2307 wrote:

Paul Mac 6CW wrote:

Ian2307 wrote:i dont get people who keep banging on about the superman punch looking awful, because its not even a finisher.

is it any more awful than the 5 knuckle shuffle??

hulks big boot??

HHH's knee to the face?

bret harts inverted atomic drop and 2nd rope elbow.

these are all set up moves, not finishers, the same as the superman punch.

i wonder how many people could stand there and take that awful move if it was legitimately thrown into their face??

It is a closed hand punch which I believe is illegal but still like the KO punch by Big Show is allowed when it suits WWE. Set up moves are fine but it is the delivery of the move that troubles me  - I'm just not believing it's effectiveness, much like the 5 knuckle shuffle or big boot - A beast like Reigns should have high impact aggressive moves, the punch is neither

all punches are closed hand punches though

I think you know what I meant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-hand_strikes

I do like the Superman Punch, its high impact and visually impressive. I prefer the double foot outside the ring dropkick though.

liverbnz wrote:Reigns was getting booed before he was out injured in the Autumn. His reaction can not be blamed solely on Daniel Bryan.

Barely. And generally by the immature. The same people who would have been talking about how WWE won't push a young talent into the main event because Cena and Orton keep taking the places

liverbnz wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:So, what he needs is, as someone with a bit of momentum and rising popularity, probably a Rumble win, a decent feud and then the title match?

And still, all that aside, the only people ahead of him who were possibles for the position by those criteria are Ziggler and Orton, maybe Ambrose but his jobbing is really not helpful. Orton, who most people bemoan not being a fresh main eventer, has been on fire and I would love him to go up against Lesnar, but no one really sees Orton having another title run yet as a face.

He needs more than a few months run with a decent fued. Rollins has had a great run since June, with plebty of defeats along the way and I would say he's probably closest of all the Shield members - but only because the roster is so lacking in depth right now. Reigns hasn't even got close to that body of work behind him and he is much newer to this business than Rollins and therefore a lot more to learn.

There was no alternative because WWE had quite clearly, from at least a year back if not more, put all their eggs in the Roman Reigns basket. Aside from Daniel Bryan, the only one was Orton as you say. I think him vs Lesnar would def be fresh and the fans would love it. For me, Orton came out the better of the SummerSlam match despite the loss and even trying to put Roman over - but we should expect this given he is the better performer of the 2.

Rollins has been brilliant, but he isn't a fit for the story. Whatever anyone says, Lesnar being champ and losing at Mania is the best story to put over a face. Rollins has been a fantastic heel and his moment is clearly based around heel traits and a cash-in.

Again, the Orton/Lesnar match up is fresh, but Orton isn't. And Bryan wasnt deemed fit until late December. And still shouldnt be trusted as a surefire injury free performer.

So, at this point, fans are basically moaning at WWE for pushing someone they isnt sure is ready. Thats very charitable of them. He's had some feuds, he's been a pivotal and at times focused on part of a trio that has main evented PPVs and had two WrestleManias, broke a Rumble record and then won a Rumble. He will face off against Bryan, where even if he performs brilliantly he will get booed when he wins. Which is funny, because he could prove himself worthy but people wont give him credit and will boo him on the basis of "not being ready"

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

liverbnz wrote:Reigns was getting booed before he was out injured in the Autumn. His reaction can not be blamed solely on Daniel Bryan.

Barely. And generally by the immature. The same people who would have been talking about how WWE won't push a young talent into the main event because Cena and Orton keep taking the places

How would you even know this???

liverbnz wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

liverbnz wrote:Reigns was getting booed before he was out injured in the Autumn. His reaction can not be blamed solely on Daniel Bryan.

Barely. And generally by the immature. The same people who would have been talking about how WWE won't push a young talent into the main event because Cena and Orton keep taking the places

How would you even know this???

Its not a fact, clearly, its an opinion. My opinion of those people. Some of whom are still part of the problem, and other naysayers have more practical reasons

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:
Its not a fact, clearly, its an opinion. My opinion of those people. Some of whom are still part of the problem, and other naysayers have more practical reasons

Smarks gonna Smark.