Roman Reigns Mega (push) Thread! *SPOILERS*

The Strawman Argument

In terms of guys who hadn't much character getting pushed in a huge way, Diesel and Batista are the two that spring to mind for me.

Batista had a similar startoff point of being part of a major faction (I'm ignoring deacon batista, obviously), but the build from that into his first mania main event was absolutely immaculate. I would say Reigns has a natural presence that is somewhere within the same realm of Batista, can probably be a better in-ring worker week-in week-out, but I dunno how Batista would've done if his build was as horrendous as Reigns's has been, I suspect Batista put a bit more thought into it all than Reigns (who very much seems to be a "I'll do what yous tell me" type guy, sounds like he has total faith in them, which really isn't going to go well with that aura he has).
Even near the start of Batista's run, Cena was already becoming the Hogan figure too.. I think it's pretty safe to say Reigns will not be a Cena or Hogan type figure for the company already.

...and Diesel sucked. Reigns has far more potential upside as a wrestler than Nash though and there's a lot more to his physicality than "big guy, very big guy".

Stereomaniac

I'm just watching SmackDown here. I haven't made it to the end yet, but Roman Reigns is set to team with Mark Henry in the main event against Kane and Seth Rollins. They seem to be making an effort to have Mark Henry endorse Roman Reigns the last couple of weeks on SmackDown. If it didn't work with Dwayne Johnson, what makes them think that someone who is less popular with the fans and hasn't achieved as much in their career will do the job? I don't know though, I still think that Roman Reigns' reactions from live audiences add a certain level of legitimacy to proceedings. I like the fact that the role of babyface and heel are becoming unavoidably muddled so that they have to acknowledge the fact that he isn't being fully supported by everyone. When I watch a hurling match I don't just see the colours of one team in the stands. It seems realistic.

leggo

Stereomaniac wrote: »

I'm just watching SmackDown here. I haven't made it to the end yet, but Roman Reigns is set to team with Mark Henry in the main event against Kane and Seth Rollins. They seem to be making an effort to have Mark Henry endorse Roman Reigns the last couple of weeks on SmackDown. If it didn't work with Dwayne Johnson, what makes them think that someone who is less popular with the fans and hasn't achieved as much in their career will do the job? I don't know though, I still think that Roman Reigns' reactions from live audiences add a certain level of legitimacy to proceedings. I like the fact that the role of babyface and heel are becoming unavoidably muddled so that they have to acknowledge the fact that he isn't being fully supported by everyone. When I watch a hurling match I don't just see the colours of one team in the stands. It seems realistic.

To be fair, that's how you get someone over. Fans, even smarter ones like us, react to something being visually reinforced week after week. Think back to John Cena, the wussy rapper who fought Eddie Guerrero in a car park as a young fella. Now think about how he is today, how used to seeing him win we are, and how shocking it is when he does lose. That's years of conditioning through them reinforcing the LOLCENAWINS notion upon us. It doesn't necessarily make him more popular, but it does make him a fit in the main event slot. We might groan when John Cena main events a pay-per view, but we don't question his worthiness there.

The problem for WWE is the likes of the stuff with Mark Henry should've taken place last September or so, when Reigns got hurt. So this conditioning process wouldn't feel so rushed and the notion that he was about to main event WrestleMania would be long bedded into our heads and they could just be firing on all cylinders now. Instead they're trying to rush it and it makes the process seem really obvious and phoney. There's a fair argument in there that the injury should've scuppered the plans because of this, but we are where we are now.

Stereomaniac

Roman Reigns is as ready as he's going to be for the moment I think. He's over with me. I'm not going to hate him just because he isn't Bryan Danielson. I just prefer Brock Lesnar. But I can't really fault Roman that much. He's doing what he's being told to do fairly well, in my opinion. The same for John Cena, in my opinion. I have no qualms with seeing him main event most of the pay per views of the year. He makes for gripping matches. Anyway, I read a lot of this thread tonight and I had better try to get some sleep. I really hope I'm not having nightmares about that condition which was outlined a few pages back, the thing about the Samoan guys growing breasts. Believe that. Maybe I'll wake up and this will all have been a dream and it turns out that Andre won in Pontiac and Hacksaw Jim Duggan got disqualified every time he used that 2 x 4 too.

DM_7

briany wrote: »

Doesn't fan-favourite mean that most people like you? Half the people at 'mania are going to be cheering Lesnar. Sounds like an unconvincing foundation for the new franchise guy. Shouldn't he be riding a wave of overwhelming popularity like Bryan was last year? Even Cena was tremendously over when coming into being the top guy. It's just not happening for Reigns in that regard. His "don't tell me I can't" promos are coming off as forced and corny. We're supposed to believe this 'gee, shucks, I'm gonna give it my best shot' stuff?

I would have been against having Bryan because of his neck, but, he's competing in the most dangerous match on the card, so I would still have him vs. Lesnar. And I'm not even a big Bryan fan, I think he comes off as corny at times as well with his nice guy act but the fans love him. That he's over 30 is immaterial, several top guys have won the belt in their mid 30s, guys have headlined 2 years in a row so that's not an issue either.

Reigns would be a fan favourite in the style of Cena. Going back to my last post they need a poster boy and Reigns is that type of guy with his look. The age profile is important as they would be looking at someone they can use for 10 years.

Who else is there that they could push into that spot, any suggestions?

There isn't even anyone in NXT that they could use as a poster boy long term.

briany

DM_7 wrote: »

Reigns would be a fan favourite in the style of Cena. Going back to my last post they need a poster boy and Reigns is that type of guy with his look. The age profile is important as they would be looking at someone they can use for 10 years.

Who else is there that they could push into that spot, any suggestions?

There isn't even anyone in NXT that they could use as a poster boy long term.

Ten years? That's your problem right there. If you can't create stars on a shorter cycle than that, then there is a problem. It doesn't help that it takes a very special performer to really be at that level in his 20s where he could be made the franchise guy, which Roman isn't. It's traditionally in their early to mid 30s where wrestlers hit their peaks as performers as Bryan and Ziggler have, for example.

The fact still remains that Roman isn't ready. Your 'look' can only take you so far. If they're so fixated on him being the guy, the smartest thing to do would be to build for a year or maybe two and let guys like Bryan or Ziggler carry the torch in the interim. It might mean Lesnar dropping to one of those two guys instead, so in a sense Roman wouldn't get his 'slamming Andre' moment, but it's not as if his beating of Lesnar would come off as believable, or even welcome, for a large number of fans.

Rjd2

Never let anybody not say Jericho is a company man.:P

IGN: I'd like to get your take on WrestleMania, if I could. At some house shows, Daniel Bryan's main eventing and Roman Reigns is in the mid-card. Do you think Reigns is currently ready for his match with Brock? Has he been positioned in the right way?

Jericho: Look, like I've said before, if you're going to give someone a shot, give them a shot. There've been tons of guys who when they've been put in the main event at WrestleMania might not have been quote unquote ready. Who's to say who's ready and who's not? Let's see how the crowd reacts when they get there. But all I know is that Roman Reigns was everybody's favorite guy until the Royal Rumble. And then everyone turned on Roman Reigns. It's so funny how two days before, and the year before, everybody loved Roman Reigns. Everybody. All the fans did. And don't tell me that you didn't because they were all saying "Roman Reigns, Roman Reigns, Roman Reigns...what? Daniel Bryan didn't win the Royal Rumble? We hate Roman Reigns! Boo!" And meanwhile, ever since then - I mean, we did house shows in Calgary and Edmonton and it was like Beatlemania. They were going nuts for him. And that was a week after the Royal Rumble. So I think that he is ready, as much as anyone can be ready in this day and age. So let's see how it goes. I mean the match he had with Daniel Bryan at Fastlane was incredible. And you can't tell me that it was all because of Daniel Bryan. Really? Because I always heard in the business that it takes two. And I think I've proven myself to be a fairly decent worker, so if I'm telling you it takes two, I think every fan should shut the hell up and listen to what I'm saying. He did a great job of living up to his end of the bargain and he'll do the same thing at WrestleMania. They will leave no stone unturned to make that a great match. They will get all the benefits. All the bells and whistles. And as long as they can hold it together, I think it's going to be great.

http://m.ie.ign.com/articles/2015/03/20/chris-jericho-to-roman-reigns-haters-shut-the-hell-up

Moneymaker

Jaysus he needs to get his tongue out of Vince's arse.

Jon Stark

I think Jericho is being a bit disingenuous there as the lack of enthusiasm for Reign's push, and how it was being executed, was around for much longer than 2 days before the Rumble.

He's right when he says we were all digging Reigns this time last year, but that was when his push wasn't being hot shotted and was going at the appropriate speed. Since then they've made a balls of things (I understand his injury didn't help) and they should have the cop on to realise that by ploughing on with their plans that they're going to ruin the guy long term.

TBH Jericho is on the payroll anyway so I wouldn't expect him to break ranks.

Angron

Yeah, there was a significant portion of the base that were against Roman a lot longer than two days pre-Rumble. Personally, I've been against what he's gotten since they gave him the slammy for Superstar of the Year despite doing perhaps one thing of note (most eliminations in the Rumble) as a singles competitor in that year. That's when it became clear they intended to push him, and screw what the fans want.

SlickRic

Also, Reigns was not everybody's favourite guy before the Royal Rumble. that is complete bollocks.

And yes, Reigns did his part against Bryan at Fastlane, but Jericho cannot tell me with a straight face that Bryan wasn't at least 80% of the reason that match was good.

i mean FFS, the crowd could tell you who the star was.

the booking in the lead-up to Fastlane was so bad, that people actually started to mildly boo Bryan. at the start of that match, you could audibly hear some boo. by the end, the place was 100% behind Bryan, and you can't tell me that's how the match would've been designed, or how the overall story was built.

the crowd has a favourite guy. the crowd has a guy who they believe is the best guy. and it's not Reigns.

Reigns is honestly just a Samoan Lex Luger with more athleticism.

rovert

Moneymaker wrote: »

Jaysus he needs to get his tongue out of Vince's arse.

https://twitter.com/IAmJericho/status/578754266204082176

:P

Angron

Well given what he was saying, he has to have expected at least a bit of that.

Rjd2

Angron wrote: »

Well given what he was saying, he has to have expected at least a bit of that.

He is one of those guys who says

" I welcome all feedback, except negative" :P

Mr.Nice Guy

SlickRic wrote: »

The big problem, and I've said it many times, is that Reigns has not had one proper feud as a singles competitor.

He defeated Orton clean at Summerslam. That was supposed to be his big breakout moment as the way the announcers sold it at the time indicates. He was then supposed to face Rollins on PPV but suffered a freakish injury that took him out of the game and left him having to return mere weeks before the Rumble. Circumstances prevented him being able to establish himself properly as a singles guy. Should they have ditched their original plan for him to win the Rumble because of that? I don't think so. I'd be more critical of the decision to put Bryan into the match and treat him as an afterthought.

SlickRic wrote:

Why the holy fúck should anyone give a shíte about Roman Reigns? He's done nothing bar be athletic, good looking, have long hair, and seem kinda cool at times. There's nothing for a fan to really latch onto. He's not like me, and he's not larger than life.

Plenty of people DO care about him as he was voted Raw Superstar of the Year last year despite not having done anything particularly noteworthy in 2014.

Some may speculate the poll was rigged but I don't buy that as they have tended to treat the results as legit going back to the Taboo Tuesday days, and logically they would not go to such extreme lengths to carefully manage their poll options whenever they invite fans to vote on their app if the whole thing was a con job. I think even Meltzer said he believes the vote was legit.

So Jericho is right in that respect. The guy does have a fanbase, it's just not particularly big on the IWC these days post-Shield split. I mean there were fans chanting 'this is awesome' when he was squaring up to Bray Wyatt during the two teams' face-off and it was quite obvious then that Reigns was being presented as the biggest deal of the group at that particular point.

As regards him not being larger than life, from what I gather is he's meant to be a very charismatic guy when he's not being compelled to stick to a script. I'm not sure even Ric Flair could make Reigns' pathetic Looney Tunes promos work.

SlickRic wrote:

the crowd has a favourite guy. the crowd has a guy who they believe is the best guy. and it's not Reigns.

Then why didn't Bryan win Superstar of the Year last year? Do you think the poll was rigged?

Reigns by all accounts is getting strong reactions at house shows and there were a few shows in the run up to Fastlane where the crowd was pretty cold towards Bryan. For example, the one where Bryan was left laying by Reigns and the crowd started using Bryan's own Yes chant to support Reigns laying him out. Would never happen in front of a hardcore crowd of course, but the casuals aren't as into Bryan as some like to make out. Now the terrible way Bryan has been presented since returning is a big factor in that I agree, but it's not as if the casual fan audience and the hardcore audience are on the same page when it comes to viewing both guys.

SlickRic wrote:

Reigns is honestly just a Samoan Lex Luger with more athleticism

Do you really believe this?

I was never a huge fan of Reigns prior to Mania but it was obvious he had a huge section of support, and while I would have preferred Bryan to have the Mania spot and a David vs Goliath battle, at least they are going with their original plan and it's a young guy getting a push.

I've been rereading The Death of WCW and it's astonishing how many young guys were pushed to the sidelines in favour of the old guard in those days. At least the WWE are giving youth a chance this time unlike last year's original plan where Batista was supposed to close out Mania with a win.

CSF

There is not a hope in hell that vote was even close to legit.

Mr.Nice Guy

CSF wrote: »

There is not a hope in hell that vote was even close to legit.

What makes you say that?

CSF

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

What makes you say that?

The fact that he is nowhere near the number one in any key demographic. Kids prefer Cena, hardcore fans prefer lots of people.

Mr.Nice Guy

CSF wrote: »

The fact that he is nowhere near the number one in any key demographic. Kids prefer Cena, hardcore fans prefer lots of people.

I think he was very much near the number one in the young audience demographic. I've seen no evidence to suggest the poll was rigged and logic suggests they have long treated the results as legit so all signs point to Reigns winning it fair and square, as surprising a result as it was.

CSF

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I think he was very much near the number one in the young audience demographic. I've seen no evidence to suggest the poll was rigged and logic suggests they have long treated the results as legit so all signs point to Reigns winning it fair and square, as surprising a result as it was.

Logic does not suggest they treat the results are legit. They frequently are tilted towards what the WWE want. Not a hope in hell he was even in top 3.

Mr.Nice Guy

CSF wrote: »

Logic does not suggest they treat the results are legit. They frequently are tilted towards what the WWE want. Not a hope in hell he was even in top 3.

The options in their app vote-ins are frequently tilted towards what the WWE wants precisely because they treat the results of such votes as legit. That says it all.

There's no basis whatsoever to say he wasn't even in the top 3.

The Strawman Argument

CSF wrote: »

There is not a hope in hell that vote was even close to legit.

IIRC WWE brought Bryan to the Slammy's and kept him backstage all show. The only reason they possibly could've done that for was so that he'd come out to a huge pop when he won superstar of the year, instead Reigns won and Bryan didn't appear at all. This was Meltzer's reasoning (again, iirc), and it makes a lot of sense.

There's a reason they so regularly have utterly meaningless options in those votes (e.g. the street fight, hardcore match or no holds barred match trio of options), they tend to be legit.

CSF

The Strawman Argument wrote: »

IIRC WWE brought Bryan to the Slammy's and kept him backstage all show. The only reason they possibly could've done that for was so that he'd come out to a huge pop when he won superstar of the year, instead Reigns won and Bryan didn't appear at all. This was Meltzer's reasoning (again, iirc), and it makes a lot of sense.

There's a reason they so regularly have utterly meaningless options in those votes (e.g. the street fight, hardcore match or no holds barred match trio of options), they tend to be legit.

More likely, Bryan was at the slammys because he wasn't aware that the WWE had rigged it, and the WWE didn't feel like making him aware for obvious reasons (wrestlers tend to tell stories once they've left).

There have been numerous cases pointed out on the WWE website where the polls have been blatantly rigged, although I agree that the reasoning for the similar options on the WWE app raw choices are designed to make it less obvious.

ThunbergsAreGo

Wouldnt rigging it be illegal?

Loughc

naughtb4 wrote: »

Wouldnt rigging it be illegal?

No not when votes are free, if they were charging people money to vote then there'd be an issue.

CSF

There were some clear cases posted here by others where they definitely did it, I'm sure one of those people will be able to clarify.

Either way, there is no way more people voted for him than Bryan or Cena. It's not like a one-off football match where you could have a different winner on the day, you're gonna always get the same winners depending on the demographic that vote, Bryan or Cena.

beakerjoe

Firstly, its been a while since Ive posted. Damn life. But no better time I guess with Wrestlemania being less than 2 weeks away.

Im not as hyped for WM this year and the main event isnt one of the reasons. Poor booking of most of the other matches listed is tone reason, lack of progression in feuds has been another. Matches I dont care for is one more, but I can accept the main event and I can be happy with Roman Reigns being in it.

I don’t hate Roman Reigns. I don’t hate the guy as a wrestler or as a character or even his real life personality. Do I have a problem with him main eventing against Brock at WM? Hell no. If anything Im happy to see a new face there.

What i do disagree with is the booking.

Firstly Romans been unfortunate that he got injured and lost a lot of momentum and since his return the booking of Reigns has hampered him. His scripted promos are garbage, well until recently. Like MNG suggested, Flair or Savage would struggle to look good reading that nonsense WWE creative feed him. Being in a feud with the Big Show and/or Kane haven’t helped either, especially losing to the Big Show on more than one occasion. Reigns didn’t look like the all conquering monster he should have been booked as.

Before the Rumble took place he hasn’t regained his momentum. At the same time, Daniel Bryan returned and Unfortunately for Reigns, fact remains that Bryan is still the IWCs number 1 choice and the young fans can get behind him too. Then the Rumble came and Reigns being ’chosen’ over Bryan, coupled with the poor booking of Bryan and others in the Rumble (it was an awful Rumble IMO). has made IWC resent him. The IWC just weren’t happy and Reigns just happened to be the target after that.

Since Fastlane The Build up hasn’t been great. Paul Heyman has done his best but its still lacking. It doesn’t feel like a big Main Event yet (it may change on Monday when they come face to face)

In relation to poll results they may not be rigged. Id say most IWC members don’t have the app or even bother voting. Id say most young kids watching live would vote for Roman or Cena. But I just don’t buy all those results as real anyway, but I cant say there bullcrap either.

Will be rooting for Reigns on Sunday? No, will I be rooting for Brock? No. What I will be rooting for is for a well booked match. With one show before the match, they have the chance to hype it up better than the state its currently at. Being the main event, I hope creative can book a good exciting match from here and I have hope it can be a success not matter what the out come.

briany

CSF wrote: »

There were some clear cases posted here by others where they definitely did it, I'm sure one of those people will be able to clarify.

Either way, there is no way more people voted for him than Bryan or Cena. It's not like a one-off football match where you could have a different winner on the day, you're gonna always get the same winners depending on the demographic that vote, Bryan or Cena.

To be honest, there's a lot of stories coming out about the WWE not so subtly trying to halt other guys' momentum, like lowering crowd mics on entrances and confiscating signs. If those are true, then a poll being rigged isn't exactly out of the realm of imagination. Are we supposed to believe that Cyber Sunday's polls weren't tampered with, for example?

JrdanB

In terms of evidence of rigging things, against Daniel Bryan in particular...

Does anyone remember this from a few years back?

http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe-raw/2012/11/27/3700254/daniel-bryan-breaks-kayfabe-revealing-raw-active-twitter-poll-to-be

Jon Stark

Jesus that's some sadcase sh1t. Pathetic to rig a vote free or not. Surprised they've actually gotten away with it without a backlash.