Did the right guy turn heel?

[Sexcellence of Sexecution]

This past summer, we saw the implosion of the Shield when Seth Rollins turned on his teammates and aligned with the Authority. It was a genuine swerve to see Rollins turn heel, because with his high flying style it always seemed as though he was more suited to the babyface role. Since then, we've seen a Rollins/Ambrose feud and we've seen Roman Reigns fighting against the Authority.

Looking back on things now, do you think it was the right call to turn Seth Rollins heel? Or should it have been one of the other two Shield members? Rollins certainly seems to have done well for himself, he gets a good amount of heat and the "You Sold Out" chants are great. But the Shield was so over, it seems likely that whoever turned would get a similar reaction. I'm not saying that turning Rollins was necessarily the wrong move, I just think it's interesting to examine the other possibilities in hindsight.

Dean Ambrose is definitely the strongest on the mic and the strongest from a character standpoint of the three. He could play a psychotic heel pretty well, but I really enjoy the whole loose cannon babyface gimmick he's working right now and there's no denying how over he's getting.

It's a little more complicated with Roman Reigns though. He gets a decent enough pop, but in 2014 it's impossible to have a sustained run as a prototypical babyface. He has the size and the look and the fans are going to turn on him because of it. Fans on the internet especially hate everyone who fits that mold. This is part of why I think the booking philosophy of wrestling needs to change. With the business being so exposed and the audience being so """smartened""" up at this point, it's impossible to really book wrestling the way it used to be booked.

That being said, if Reigns was the one to turn heel, it would make a lot of sense. Because of the fact that he has the prototypical "look", it's logical that the Authority would back him as the next big thing. If Triple H sees Daniel Bryan as a B+ player because of his size, does it really make sense from a storyline perspective that he would back Seth Rollins as the future? Rollins and Ambrose are much much less likely to be turned on by the fans as babyfaces because of their perceived superior in-ring ability. I'm not saying Roman Reigns sucks in the ring, far from it, but the perception of idiot fans is that if you're big and jacked you can't wrestle. You might as well play on that perception and position the guy that fans are more likely to boo anyways as the heel. Play up the fact that the office wants to push guys who fit that mold, while the fans want guys who don't. Using reality in an angle has proven to be very effective in the past.

That's my perspective on all of this, but what do you think? In retrospect would you still have done the Rollins turn? Or would you have turned Reigns or Ambrose?

 

[TheICChampion]

That being said, if Reigns was the one to turn heel, it would make a lot of sense. Because of the fact that he has the prototypical "look", it's logical that the Authority would back him as the next big thing. If Triple H sees Daniel Bryan as a B+ player because of his size, does it really make sense from a storyline perspective that he would back Seth Rollins as the future?

In a way, it does, simply because as a heel it's somewhat a requirement for you to be a hypocrite and change your opinion as often as you change your clothes. I see it all the time, kinda like JBL does every week. Besides, HHH "chose" Rollins, as opposed to Daniel Bryan who got over on his own, it makes sense you would rather back someone you pick. That being said, I agree that maybe Reigns would be better suited as a heel, and who knows? It could happen. Hardly anyone spends their entire career as heel or face. They usually switch it up.

 

[LBGetBack]

I agree with you. While Rollins has done well as a heel, and the turn was a genuine shock, I do agree with you on Reigns. I think Reigns turning would've still been a surprise as most probably thought Ambrose would be the one to turn when it eventually happened. And I agree with your points....Reigns being the prototype of the kind of guy WWE often pushes would make him a great fit for the handpicked chosen one of the authority.

I feel that eventually Rollins style will start earning him cheers again, and Reigns will start getting booed(he already was getting a few before the injury).

 

[theblasterkid]

I think that when Reigns win the WWEWHC at some point in his career it would be wise to turn him then because then he can be placed with a mouthpiece. I see Reigns as another Diesel like character if they let him be more of myself. A good mouthpiece for him would be someone like Scott Hall. Another idea is to do a double turn between Rollins and Reigns because I can see Rollins having a hell of a babyface run in the future. Ambrose I see staying babyface for a minute because the lose cannon babyface is working for him as a character.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Did the right guy turn heel?

Yes, right guy did turn heel.

Ambrose is almost full package. Interesting persona, good mic and ring skills. Heel or face, he would work out both ways.

Reigns is either monster heel who you hate until some monster face beats him or monster face who overpowers oponents while crowd cheers. When you look him as "new face of the comapny" its logical choice for him to stay face especially when he got so good reaction in Shield vs Evolution and before that.

Rollins is someone who needs that heel turn right now. He is great performer but still little slim with micwork and other stuff. If he was face he would probablly got lost in roster of generic faces who do great in ring but barely do something significant like Kofi Kingston. Like this he got good exposure. Got good heat from traitoring Shield and gets good heat as Authoritys pawn. Unlike Ambrose and Reigns, he needed it the most.

So, in my opinion, good call from WWE.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I think Dean should have turned heel and they should have pushed Seth as their new Jeff Hardy. We'd pretty much be seeing something like 2009's Jeff Hardy vs. CM Punk with these two.

Then again, we'll never if that would have been better than what they have going on now. We'll eventually see face Seth vs. a heel Dean down the line so I don't think it matters. We're in for some great 10 years featuring occasional battles between these two.

When all is said and done, I expect Seth and Dean to have had at least 10 PPV 1-on-1 matches, with at least 1 at WrestleMania and for them to have at least 1 tag title reign together.

 

[HeroForHire]

They went with Seth Rollins, because I think everyone expected it to be Dean who would turn heel. Do I think it is the right move? I think he is doing good. The moment they created when he turned on the Shield made sense, and it created a great moment. The crowd was shocked. Everyone was shocked. I don't think I would change it if I was given the chance.

 

[L@RISANO]

Roman Reigns was the most over of the trio during the Shield's face run especially and his momentum took a slight down turn because of a lack of continuity in his subsequent singles feuds more than anything. Depending on how his comeback from injury goes, it is not farfetched that he might well end up having a heel run at some point soon anyways.


Dean Ambrose was the one that the majority expected to turn heel, and his face/tweener run subsequently has been nothing short of brilliant thus far.


Seth Rollins looked great as a high-flying babyface character, but let's face it, there is only so far that stuff will take you in the WWE Main Event. Him turning heel gave him his own identity when going onto his Singles run and as I explained in my thread, he has continued to build heat since he became Traitorface and the decision to turn him heel has been vindicated.


So, the decision to turn Seth Rollins was absolutely the right decision and Seth's ability to generate heat even on the last RAW confirms that the WWE hit the nail on the head in their execution of the break-up.

 

[DCLXVI]

I think they went about it the right way... they did do what would seem like the unexpected as far as Rollins/Ambrose go. Rollins has really taken the ball and ran with it, wrestles heel style now cut out all of the Kamikaze style high flying... very comfortable on the mic.

I loved Ambrose in the shield, and he is a good tweener and there is no doubt he is over. I'm not turning on him - I just hate the whole wrestling style he's adopted, jumping on guys and throwing wild bad looking punches... using a kendo stick and props... between the hot dog stand and the "Halloween street fight" with pumpkins and candy - I don't know how that doesn't come off as silly to just about anyone for an intense character to do but I guess that isn't his fault.

Reigns wasn't ready for the monster push he was receiving and it's probably for the best he disappeared for a bit. His look screams face so I wouldn't mess with that... but the whole "I'm gonna kick your ass..." or "I'm gonna punch right through you..." will get old very quickly, he needs some character development/promo work but he has the look and athleticism.

 

[Navi]

Dean Ambrose is definitely the strongest on the mic and the strongest from a character standpoint of the three. He could play a psychotic heel pretty well, but I really enjoy the whole loose cannon babyface gimmick he's working right now and there's no denying how over he's getting.

I will agree that Ambrose out of the three stands out the most on the mic and character wise he can't be beat. I would disagree that he's a babyface though. He's only a babyface because of who he's feuding with and he can easily turn on anyone at a moments notice. I think he'll remain a tweener for quite some time, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him take on Ziggler, Cena or anyone else to gets in his way.

It's a little more complicated with Roman Reigns though. He gets a decent enough pop, but in 2014 it's impossible to have a sustained run as a prototypical babyface. He has the size and the look and the fans are going to turn on him because of it. Fans on the internet especially hate everyone who fits that mold. This is part of why I think the booking philosophy of wrestling needs to change. With the business being so exposed and the audience being so """smartened""" up at this point, it's impossible to really book wrestling the way it used to be booked.

Agreed he has the size and look, but he can have a run as a babyface with no problems. Why should the fans turn on him, what has he done wrong to make them turn on him? His only problem so far as been booking which has been horrible. You can only have a feud with Kane and Randy Orton for so long, before even they would get sick of it. He should have had a feud with someone a lot more interesting than those two, and things might have been different.

As for the fans being "smartined" up, well sometimes I think, myself included that we are too smart for our own good. Yes we have all thought at some point in time we can book this product better. If that was the case, then Vince McMahon would be sitting at home watching our product, not us watching his. Maybe instead of looking at every little fault in the WWE, we should just say screw it and enjoy the product, instead of dissecting it down to atoms.

That being said, if Reigns was the one to turn heel, it would make a lot of sense. Because of the fact that he has the prototypical "look", it's logical that the Authority would back him as the next big thing. If Triple H sees Daniel Bryan as a B+ player because of his size, does it really make sense from a storyline perspective that he would back Seth Rollins as the future? Rollins and Ambrose are much much less likely to be turned on by the fans as babyfaces because of their perceived superior in-ring ability. I'm not saying Roman Reigns sucks in the ring, far from it, but the perception of idiot fans is that if you're big and jacked you can't wrestle. You might as well play on that perception and position the guy that fans are more likely to boo anyways as the heel. Play up the fact that the office wants to push guys who fit that mold, while the fans want guys who don't. Using reality in an angle has proven to be very effective in the past.

So basically if the guy is big like a Reigns then he has to be a heel, because if he isn't the fans will boo him because he's big. That makes no sense at all.

Also the fact that Rollins and Ambrose would get cheered because they aren't as big as a Roman Reigns makes even less sense.

When the Shield was together, the three fit together well. Ambrose was like the class clown, and everyone loves the class clown. Reigns was the good looking athletic that all the girls go for. Rollins was the nerd, and no one likes the nerd, no matter how smart he is. They don't want to be seen with him.

That's why they turned him heel, he needed it the most. He great in the ring, good on the mic, but he doesn't have the looks or the personality of the other two. Ambrose will do fine in whatever role he carves out for himself, same with Reigns, he's the best looking guy in the roster and he will always have the ladies falling all over him. He has the female fan base wrapped up. Mom's will take their kids to see Cena, they will come to see Reigns. Rollins will have to work his ass off unfortunately. That's the way I see it anyway.

 

[kadroan]

I think turning Rollins was the right move. It was the most unpredictable move.

I would have expected Reigns since The Authority is like The Corporation. I figured Reigns would be their champion like The Rock was The Corporation. Reigns would eventually turn on The Authority like The Rock did with The Corporation to become a bigger face.

I had no idea Ambrose could have been a good face but it works. Everybody should see Ambrose as a heel would have no brainer which is why him in The Authority wouldn't be such a surprise.

Rollins been in the shadows of Reigns and Ambrose. Him turning was the best thing that could have happened for his career. Otherwise he'd be just another midcarder.

 

[Sexcellence of Sexecution]

I will agree that Ambrose out of the three stands out the most on the mic and character wise he can't be beat. I would disagree that he's a babyface though. He's only a babyface because of who he's feuding with and he can easily turn on anyone at a moments notice. I think he'll remain a tweener for quite some time, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him take on Ziggler, Cena or anyone else to gets in his way.

There is no such thing as a tweener and there never has been. Ambrose is a babyface, he is put in a position to be cheered by the fans, that's what a babyface is. Yes he's a bit of an antihero but that doesn't make him a "tweener", he's still a face. Steve Austin was a babyface, not a tweener. No one has ever been a tweener.

Agreed he has the size and look, but he can have a run as a babyface with no problems. Why should the fans turn on him, what has he done wrong to make them turn on him? His only problem so far as been booking which has been horrible. You can only have a feud with Kane and Randy Orton for so long, before even they would get sick of it. He should have had a feud with someone a lot more interesting than those two, and things might have been different.

He hasn't done anything for the fans to turn on him, but it doesn't matter. They will. It already started even before he was getting injured. If you have the look and are pushed strongly as a babyface the fans will resent it and feel you are being "shoved down their throats".

As for the fans being "smartined" up, well sometimes I think, myself included that we are too smart for our own good. Yes we have all thought at some point in time we can book this product better. If that was the case, then Vince McMahon would be sitting at home watching our product, not us watching his. Maybe instead of looking at every little fault in the WWE, we should just say screw it and enjoy the product, instead of dissecting it down to atoms.

I agree that the fans are too smart for their own good. It's a large part of what's killing the business. Unfortunately when the internet now being accessible to pretty much everyone this is going to become a bigger and bigger problem, and the way wrestling is booked needs to account for it and change.

So basically if the guy is big like a Reigns then he has to be a heel, because if he isn't the fans will boo him because he's big. That makes no sense at all.

Also the fact that Rollins and Ambrose would get cheered because they aren't as big as a Roman Reigns makes even less sense.

It makes perfect sense. There is a perception among fans on the internet that bigger and more muscular wrestlers who work a certain style are less talented in the ring than smaller guys who use more aerial moves and technical wrestling. This is a dumb mentality of course, but it is the reality of fans in the internet age unfortunately. This is why you see people constantly talking about how guys like Cena, Batista and Reigns only have 5 moves when Daniel Bryan, Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart all had move sets that were every bit as limited.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Dean Ambrose is definitely the strongest on the mic and the strongest from a character standpoint of the three.

Do you think so? I would say Rollins has been a more potent verbal presence than Ambrose....and certainly more so than Reigns.

The thing is, as their careers progress, we'll have plenty of chances to see each one play parts that contrast to what they are now. If anything, I've been more surprised that two of the three evil Shield-ites were cast as good guys. Yes, it was easier to see it coming with Roman Reigns because his "silent good guy" approach lends itself to face-dom and we could see the way the fans were taking to him even when he was technically still a heel.

The Dean Ambrose direction surprised me; it's tougher to think of a lunatic operating as a face....yet, this is exactly the type of thing WWE has done so well through the years; casting people against type.

Still, while I see Dean as being an "interesting" speaker, I doubt his mic style would get over if he were a traditional good guy....i.e., if he were sane. So, the same qualities that make us love Ambrose now are the ones we'll hate him for when the time comes. A lunatic is a lunatic.

Yes, I think turning Rollins heel was the smartest move, largely because he was the one I least expected to see do it. Meanwhile, the same qualities that make him an effective bad guy will serve him well when he eventually has a change of heart and tells us he actually loved us all along.

 

[cool]

yes , Rollins will greatly benefits from it

 

[elbowdrop]

Of the three, he was the less interesting. Turning him the way they did made him relevant. Had it been one of the others , he'd just be a guy.

Plus he looks like a villain from a die hard flick

 

[chuckmdubya]

If I could go back and rewrite I might make Rollins and Reigns turn on Ambrose and both become Authority heels. Ambrose was slated to become a face, so maybe he could've been an even stronger face having to fight them both. And neither of them have the mic skills or the "it factor" as strong as Ambrose, having HHH, Kane, and Orton around has helped Rollins a lot to get over as a heel.

 

[Navi]

There is no such thing as a tweener and there never has been. Ambrose is a babyface, he is put in a position to be cheered by the fans, that's what a babyface is. Yes he's a bit of an antihero but that doesn't make him a "tweener", he's still a face. Steve Austin was a babyface, not a tweener. No one has ever been a tweener.

Well this is something you and I will have a agree to disagree on. To me a tweener is someone who straddles the line. Yes the fans cheer him, but he was not only willing to take on Rollins but also go through Cena to get to Rollins. Ambrose is someone who will blaze his own trail, and take out anyone face or heel who gets in front of him.

He hasn't done anything for the fans to turn on him, but it doesn't matter. They will. It already started even before he was getting injured. If you have the look and are pushed strongly as a babyface the fans will resent it and feel you are being "shoved down their throats".

I also don't understand this "shoving him down our throats" idea. For a long time now the IWC has been bitching and complaining about John Cena. He wins too many matches, he buries too many people, he's always in the main event and he always wins the title. Now they are pushing someone else to take his place and the perception which I will now call "The Cena Effect" is already in place.

Do we really want 12 more years of John Cena in the top spot or do we want others up there sharing the stage with him. You can't have it both ways, and I think the WWE are trying their hardest to make it so.

Quite honestly the only person I see being shoved down our throats on a weekly basis is Kane. If he's not making matches, he's in the match, or interfering in the match, or just standing around outside the ring or holding someone down so Rollins can curbstomp them. He's one that could disappear tomorrow and I wouldn't miss him.

I agree that the fans are too smart for their own good. It's a large part of what's killing the business. Unfortunately when the internet now being accessible to pretty much everyone this is going to become a bigger and bigger problem, and the way wrestling is booked needs to account for it and change.

Why should they change an age old way of booking just to please the internet wresting crowd. I mean seriously wrestling can't get anymore simple than it already is. You have the good guys and the bad guys, you put them in an enclosure and have them fight it out for supremacy. This is the way it's always been, and it shouldn't change. Just cause we think we're all knowing and powerful now, changing it to anything other than it is would ruin the product. Maybe we have to change our way of thinking, if that's even possible.

It makes perfect sense. There is a perception among fans on the internet that bigger and more muscular wrestlers who work a certain style are less talented in the ring than smaller guys who use more aerial moves and technical wrestling. This is a dumb mentality of course, but it is the reality of fans in the internet age unfortunately. This is why you see people constantly talking about how guys like Cena, Batista and Reigns only have 5 moves when Daniel Bryan, Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart all had move sets that were every bit as limited.

I'm a wrestling fan and I don't think that way at all. Maybe these guys only need 5 moves to get the job finished. Strange I don't hear this said about heels like Rusev, who have the same limited moveset and win every match they're in.

I think the ICW just doesn't like faces, they enjoy the heels more because well I don't know why really. Randy Orton just turned face or is about to, and he's still Randy Orton. Same with any other wrestler. I enjoy the way someone wrestles, and don't care about whether they are a heel or a face. I've said it before, I watch to be entertained and for nothing else. If I'm entertained then it's all good. When it stops being all good, then I'll stop watching.

 

[RedRegan1005]

I think they made the absolute right call. Turning Ambrose would have been too expected, and Reigns is a natural babyface, and I don't think he has the chops yet to run as a heel yet. Rollins is the best heel in the company right now for me. You can tell he has gained a lot of confidence for the role, and its shining on the mic.

 

[MartialHorror]

I believe so and I think this way for a few reasons.

1) Ambrose was too predictable to be the one to turn.
2) Ambrose was booked as a REALLY weak heel. It always seemed like he was getting his ass kicked the most. He was trounced by Mark Henry, requiring Rollins to save the day in contrast to Reigns squashing Henry.
3) Roman Reigns was too over with the fans to be the bad guy. If WWE went in that direction, his career would've likely floundered Cesaro-style.
4) Seth Rollins was kind of bland compared to the others in terms of personality. Being the villain allowed him to create a more memorable character.

So I think it was the right decision.

 

[87wcw87]

I think wwe needed to get Rollins some hype so they turned him heal. Ambrose can turn anytime and they see that. Be good if survivor series both teams had a member each who could reveal themselves anytime during the match, with cena having ryback and authority bringin out reigns as a surprise. Makes sense to me to have heel reigns beat face cena at mania 31. I think lesnar vs cesaro or lesnar vs Wyatt would suite mania 31 better. Van do much more with reigns as heel. All 3 of shield members actually

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

Well this is something you and I will have a agree to disagree on. To me a tweener is someone who straddles the line.

Ya, the "tweener" DOES exist and it's not a new concept. I've seen three different definitions of it that make sense:

1. The face who uses heel tactics (Nick Bockwinkel in the mid-1980s).

2. The "loose cannon" who just beats up faces and heels with equal opportunity (Scott Steiner in early 2000).

3. The "cool" heel who takes "coolness" to another level and gets cheered to the extent that he might as well be a face (Kevin Nash at various times).

Anybody who falls into one of those categories can validly be called a "tweener" in my view at least.