Isn't it that amazing heels are booed these days?

[Radical]

I must say, I'm am pretty amazed that some heels still managed to get booed these days in WWE.

Why? Because WWE seems like they've forgotten how to build heel heat. Heels no longer do heelish things, or if they do, it's very rare! So why should anyone hate them?

The wrestlers who get booed by fans aren't even the 'heels' all the time they are just the wrestlers that fans don't really care for that much.

Reigns used to get booed a lot but he was supposed to be a face. He got booed probably because fans didn't like how high he was being pushed by WWE.

Ryback had been booed by fans, even though he was supposed to be face, probably because fans thought he was boring in the ring.

The Miz does get booed but that's probably because Mike Mizanin is truly an irritating, cocky bugger who rubs people the wrong way so his personality gets him boos. But it's not because he uses heelish tactics in the ring.

Rusev is the only one who gets pretty thunderous boos and that's just because of his anti-American gimmick. It's not because he's heelish in the ring. He doesn't cheat, he just over powers his opponents.

But for all those guys stated above and any other 'supposed-to-be' heels, why should anyone really boo them when they fight fair just like the faces?

Seth Rollins is the most actually heelish of all the heels on the roster because he does heelish things. He gets wins from distractions, cheats and forces his opponents into submission. But that's only one guy.


Why is WWE so resistant to letting heels be heels?

For a more recent experiment you can look at Sheamus and King Barrett. Both are back and supposed to be heels. But have they cheated to win? Have they used a foreign object in a match? Have they held on to a submission for a 4 count constantly? Have they choked their opponent over and over until the ref is about to DQ them? Or have they even beaten down their opponent after a match so badly that you couldn't help but feel sour as to their actions?

NO. They haven't.

So why should they be booed? They win matches fair and square, just like the faces. Sure they come out and distract their opponent sometimes to cost them a victory but faces do that too, sometimes. Sure, they do beat down their opponent after a match but faces sometimes do that too in retaliation.

I guess this what WWE wanted a while back when I heard they said something about "there are no heels, just shades of grey" so everyone could be cheered or booed by any fans just depending on how the fans feel about them at the time.

What do you think?

Are you amazed that wrestlers still get booed in WWE since the heels don't really do heelish things?

Do you think WWE should change this? Or stay the same?

 

[SoulTrain4]

I hate the way WWE utilizes heels but they have always done it that way it's just far more irritating and far worse booked today.

The WWWF and all subsequent forms of the organization was one of the very rare "babyface territories". In a "babyface territory" the faces are usually really dominant and they hold the title while fending off a number of baddies. Sammartino, Backlund, Hogan etc it's been like this for 40 years.

But since about 2006 when Cena became cemented as that new superhero it's gotten really ridiculous. Heels have turned into Team Rocket where they get beat every week by the same people over and over again in matches that aren't that much different from each other.

They don't allow heels to gain any momentum, which is essentially in storytelling. If I just see the bad guy get beat for free ok TV then why am I paying to see the same shit?!

Granted this is something I noticed more as an adult and perhaps kids don't notice it at all but if you really want to make money they need stronger heels. That's what works from a storytelling perspective but hey, WWE outlasted all the other territories using this bad guy assembly like philosophy I don't expect them to change it now.

There's a lot of guys who could benefit from WWE taking heels more seriously, one of em being Vince's pocketbook. When the only way to break attendance records etc is doing face vs face matches regularly then you know you have a problem.

 

[Aquaman6686]

Seth Rollins is the most actually heelish of all the heels on the roster because he does heelish things. He gets wins from distractions, cheats and forces his opponents into submission. But that's only one guy.


Why is WWE so resistant to letting heels be heels?

For a more recent experiment you can look at Sheamus and King Barrett. Both are back and supposed to be heels. But have they cheated to win? Have they used a foreign object in a match? Have they held on to a submission for a 4 count constantly? Have they choked their opponent over and over until the ref is about to DQ them? Or have they even beaten down their opponent after a match so badly that you couldn't help but feel sour as to their actions?

NO. They haven't.

So why should they be booed? They win matches fair and square, just like the faces. Sure they come out and distract their opponent sometimes to cost them a victory but faces do that too, sometimes. Sure, they do beat down their opponent after a match but faces sometimes do that too in retaliation.

Sheamus, Rusev, and Barrett are the rare GOOD type of heels in WWE. Rollins is the example of a poorly built, stereotypical WWE chicken$h!t heel. Rollins is the only type of heel WWE understands how to build these days. Heels SHOULD be winning matches clean and simply beating their opponents. The problems with guys like Seth Rollins is that they're booked as being incapable of winning matches without interference. It makes them looks weak and hurts their ability to draw fans. More heels need to be dominant and powerful, end of story.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Sheamus, Rusev, and Barrett are the rare GOOD type of heels in WWE.

Rusev and Sheamus sure but Barrett? I don't think one of the least over heels on the roster helps your point here.

Rollins is the example of a poorly built, stereotypical WWE chicken$h!t heel.Rollins is the only type of heel WWE understands how to build these days. Heels SHOULD be winning matches clean and simply beating their opponents. The problems with guys like Seth Rollins is that they're booked as being incapable of winning matches without interference.

I will agree that in this specific instance they aren't doing Seth any favors with his booking. There's nothing wrong with him cheating to win his major matches but there has to be something to differentiate him from the rest of the pack. Having him need outside interference to beat Neville is fucking ridiculous. Jobbing him out to Ambrose last night in an unclean fashion is alright; he was going blow for blow with Ambrose until the goons fucked up and even then he got caught with a rollup. However, the constant jobbing him out in these nothing tag matches is ridiculous, especially since his partner is usually Kane or someone else who can take a pin.

Again, he doesn't have to be overly protected, it isn't his "fighting" ability that got him to the top anyway. But it would definitely help to show that he is at least above an NXT rookie.

It makes them looks weak and hurts their ability to draw fans.

Again, in Seth's case they aren't really doing it right but to generalize all chickenshit heels like this is simply incorrect. Ric Flair never won his big matches cleanly while he was a top heel and he drew money. Can you name one time when Hollywood Hogan won anything clean during his big heel run in WCW? In fact if you go through history you'd probably be hard pressed to find any monster heels that had big main event runs, winning matches cleanly. Brock Lesnar is pretty much the only one and he was protected by the fact that he was never there. Could you imagine the level of whining we'd see on this board if Lesnar had been winning every match clean at every PPV from Summerslam until Wrestlemania?

Chickenshit heels are built more often because they draw more long term. People pay in hopes that they will get to see them lose. They have more longevity since losing doesn't really hurt their credibility, it isn't their in-ring prowess that got them to the top anyway, so they can easily be inserted back into the main event picture. Just look at Edge.

Monster heels are often built to give a babyface something to overcome, they aren't built to be long term draws. Once a monster heel loses during his initial run on top, he loses most of his luster. The good ones become faces at least for a little while and if they're good, they'll get another run at it. The shit ones become Sid.

As for the OP, Sheamus lost to Ziggler fair and square and rather than being a man and honoring the stipulation, he hit Dolph in the dick and pushed his ass in his face. Not to mention he constantly talks about beating up people smaller than him. How does the fact that he doesn't always cheat to win make him less of a heel? I mean, Floyd Mayweather wins his fights fair and square but he seems to be pretty hated.

 

[ASKane]

When did heels go down hill, when WWE went PG. Since WWE has been focused on the kids it has become all about getting the faces over and building heels to be the guys to get them there. Cena has long list of guys who had risen up the ranks as heels just to be fed to him to help build him up to be the top star, hell its happening now, 1 year of dominance for Rusev then 2 straight defeats to Cena. WWE's has focused on making heels look strong until the big match with a face and then the face wins, for me this is one of the worst parts of the switch to PG, the face always wins and always does it despite hitting about 25% of the moves in a match and always being considered the underdog because thats how you inspire the kiddies.

Also a big problem WWE has is when they have built true heels in the past they have a cool factor to them which means instead of wanting to boo them fans like, see the Shield and Wyatt Family. WWE built 2 of the best heel stables, gave them the big stage, they took out the top faces and became more over than the faces they were attacking. I think with the switch in fan mentality where the bad guy is the guy to cheer for WWE is screwed when it comes to building good heels unless they were excellent at creating storylines to get them over which they clearly aren't

 

[Wrestlingaholic]

@Nate daMac: Hollywood Hogan isn't the best example, for two reasons: firstly, WCW were putting over the nWo as a group rather than Hogan alone; and secondly he was ten years older, and not a patch on physically, than most of the opponents he faced between Bash at the Beach 1996 and Starrcade 1997: Luger, Sting, the Giant: all of whom, as wrestling got more 'real' (ie stepped away from the cartoon-like nature of 1985-95) you would believe would not lose to Hogan without some kind of interference.

Sadly WCW did what they always do and they threw in some needless feuds like Hogan v Roddy Piper at Starrcade '96, but by and large the run-ins worked because people would not accept an ageing Hogan winning clean over his younger, fresher rivals, and if anything it protected them more than making Hogan look weak

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I agree to a certain extent because there are too many instances of WWE costing heels heat. We've seen it with Wyatt, Barrett, Ziggler, we're seeing it somewhat with Rusev, etc. Rollins is a good example in that it isn't so much that he cheats, but that he comes off too much like a whiney, entitled bitch who needs protection via outside interference too often. I have no problem if he pulled tights, used a foreign object, used the ropes, etc. to win every match he has but it gets tiresome to see J&J Security, Kane and/or Big Show jump into the ring almost every single time he wrestles. Sure it makes him look sleazy and there's nothing wrong with some interference every now & then, but every single time coupled with all the whining & complaining presents Rollins as TOO MUCH of a coward.

However, I don't think it's right to lay it all at WWE's feet because fans themselves are part of the problem. In NXT, for example, look at the cheers Kevin Owens gets despite being consistently portrayed as a calculating, manipulative sociopath. He's booked to look like a very strong heel who does some despicable things, he smacks people around, "bullies" them, etc. yet a lot of fans still cheer for him. He's not a tweener, he doesn't play up to the fans, yet he gets a lot of cheers because there are way too many fans these days that simply don't want to suspend disbelief. We've also seen it on the main roster with Bray Wyatt, Harper and Rowan well before some poor booking choices cost them some momentum; a sociopathic cult leader preaching about destruction and the futility of existence, yet people cheer for him?

I also think that there are way too many fans who want just about everyone to be a specific type of persona: some nigh unstoppable, badass shit-kicker that takes no guff from anyone.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Why is WWE so resistant to letting heels be heels?

When it comes to analyzing what makes a heel a heel, I would say a nasty attitude identifies a bad guy just as much as a rake of the eyes or kick to the family jewels......and all the bad guys on the roster have these attitudes down pat.

The advent of the 'tweener has re-shaped the definition of heels vs. faces. Before that, good guys were entirely virtuous while heels were eternally scum (with many individual exceptions, of course). Today, the lines have been blurred, and in my opinion, this makes the product we see far more realistic than in the old days, and far more hard to figure, which is a good thing.

If you want an example of what I'm talking about, take John Cena vs. Sami Zayn this past RAW. Cena is a face (in fact, the face of WWE) and he used absolutely no illegal tactics in his match, yet there was no question he was playing the bad guy on Monday, presumably in order to put Sami Zayn over before his hometown crowd. What was different about Cena? His attitude.

The company is letting heels be heels.....it's just that the definition of what makes a heel is evolving.

 

[kadroan]

Sheamus, Rusev, and Barrett are the rare GOOD type of heels in WWE. Rollins is the example of a poorly built, stereotypical WWE chicken$h!t heel. Rollins is the only type of heel WWE understands how to build these days. Heels SHOULD be winning matches clean and simply beating their opponents. The problems with guys like Seth Rollins is that they're booked as being incapable of winning matches without interference. It makes them looks weak and hurts their ability to draw fans. More heels need to be dominant and powerful, end of story.

Yeah Sheamus and Rusev are great. I can't say the same about Barrett. He could easily be get cheered for the things he do. I'd say New Day are great heels. They get the reaction and know how to generate more heat.