I was watching Daniel Bryan vs Seth Rollins to determine who goes on to face Roman Reigns at Fastlane and something hit me. So obviously Daniel Bryan wins the match and goes on to lose to Roman Reigns. Moreover, he sort of shakes hands with him post-match in somewhat of a "I respect you, you've earned it" fashion, if I remember correctly? So basically, Daniel being a company guy did his "job" and tried to "put" Roman "over". It got me thinking. Let's say hypothetically, Daniel Bryan was healthy and wouldn't be liable to "injure" himself after winning the IC title in the ladder match. Wouldn't they still book him, basically "use" him to put their chosen guy Roman Reigns over? Don't get me wrong. I know that Wrestling in general and the WWE is about "making money". I also understand the scripted nature of Wrestling, which means that a terrible wrestler can be a maineventer for years while the Daniel Bryans and Eddie Guerreros fight for midcard titles or tag-team titles. But does it justify Bryan having to lose to Roman and saying " I respect you" ? because to me it's more like a slap on my face which says, "Roman Reigns is great". Sometimes the biggest star or merchandise-seller is a good wrestler and most of the times he isn't the "best" wrestler on the roster, nor the best "overall" performer. I'd like to use the history of the WWE from 1985 up to 2015 as an example. I wasn't alive prior to 1989 and as a result I know little about wrestling back then, besides the fact that Hulk Hogan ruled the WWF and was champion for years and years, until his departure. May be Randy Savage was to HH what Daniel Bryan is to John Cena, but this analogy isn't supposed to be taken too "literally" . Now after Hogan's departure, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were "the chosen ones" and I have no issues with that. Followed by Rock and Austin. The real problem in my eyes began with John Cena's rise in 2005. IMO, John Cena was a mediocre, if not downright "atrocious" wrestler in 2005, and he is so in 2015. Nothing any of you can say will change that, or change my opinion/conviction. It's almost mathematical...Bret Hart>Hulk Hogan, just as Kurt Angle or Brock Lesnar > John Cena. Period. This certainly isn't a John Cena-bash thread, it's just that my main argument is entwined with John Cena and Roman Reigns as the "chosen ones". Here's an analogy:- I remember the Kurt Angle-John Cena feud for the WWE championship from Raw in 2005, which not only did Kurt lose but was booked as a "coward heel" throughout it. This gem of a wrestler fucking had Daivari as his own personal referee, for chrissakes. Inference:-Kurt Angle isn't good enough to carry Raw or the company as WWE champion. He might be the greatest wrestler on the roster but since John Cena sells merchandise and the kids love him, and since Kurt Angle is supposed to be a "heel", he will lose the matches and the feud. Followed by being drafted to Smackdown, and fucking ECW in 2006. During the 2007 draft lottery, Chris Benoit was drafted to ECW and he had a match on Raw against John Cena which he lost. I vividly remember how Chris extended his hand towards him and they shook hands and it was like, "I respect you John Cena". To me, it just proves that being one of the best technical wrestlers in the world, hell, being one of the TOP 5 doesn't really matter because if Vince Mcmahon says so, you'll have to put a mediocre, awful wrestler like John Cena "over" just like Daniel Bryan did with Roman Reigns. (Please do not involve what Chris would later go on to do in his personal life, as it bears no relation to the argument at hand). Isn't that what the WWE did with Bryan? Now let's just also use Batista as an example. He was the champion on smackdown in 2005 and he had a match with Eddie Guerrero at No Mercy, which IMO is one of the best matches you'll ever see. I also think Batista always was a superior wrestler to John Cena and I don't have a problem with him. But where's the logic in using Daniel Bryan, a better wrestler, to lose to Roman Reigns and shaking hands and saying "I respect you" when Roman Reigns downright sucks? I used to believe like some of you here that Roman Reigns has improved. But I firmly believe today that it's BS. There is no fucking improvement, and if there is any, it's really negligible. You know what improvement is? Batista in 2002, being groomed by Ric Flair and HHH, followed by Batista in 2005 both on the mic and in the ring. THAT'S IMPROVEMENT. I realize that Wrestling and the WWE are about making money, but what good is it pushing Roman Reigns for years, and overlooking Bryan? And this isn't just about Bryan. I invoked elaborately..throughout this thread, the likes of Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit, AND Daniel Bryan. I antagonized Cena and Roman. Suffice to say, considering John Cena's career, and considering the booking of Roman Reigns in the last 2 years itself...is it wrong to say that the WWE will ignore competent wrestlers like Bryan even if they happen to bring in money? What about Kurt Angle in 2005? (And I by no means am saying Kurt underachieved, quite contrary). I have already pointed it out, that when the said wrestler is at least competent, like Batista in 2005, I have no problem if he doesn't happen to be the greatest technical wrestler on earth. But it seems to me that the history of the WWE since 2005, and probably before the advent of Bret Hart/Shawn Michaels as "maineventers" [So basically pre-1995(before Bret and Shawn), and post-2005(since John Cena).],..was a history of pushing the bad/unidimensional wrestler just because he happens to sell merchandise, possess some level of charisma, and may be ably perform 4-5 maneuvers. Finally, our favourite wrestlers with the exception of Seth Rollins, aren't likely to be pushed to mainevents, until they do something like Punk did in July 2011. I would once again like to emphasize that Roman Reigns was terrible in the ring around Fastlane last year and he is so THIS YEAR. Nothing the WWE does will change that fact, or my opinion. He isn't half as good as Batista was. Period. Feel free to oppose me, or agree. But do say something about:- Is the WWE just a grand conspiracy and are we all(IWC) deluded?