It's time to rejoice and embrace a little optimism and hero-worship.

[AegonTargaryen]

1)I admit, I don't even like the noun Optimism, although the Latin Optimus/Optima/Optimum seem to be a pretty good triplet of masculine/feminine/neuter adjectives.

2)No less than four threads on Roman Reigns have sprung up in the last 48 hours. Most IWC members seem to be experiencing profound revulsion considering how Roman Reigns won the title, and pretty much everything concerning him.

3)Most of us had been in concord as to why Roman Reigns sucks as a wrestler and a persona, and nothing seems to have hindered our agreement, until this Raw.

4)Yes, Reigns won. Yes, he's the champion. But why be so negative about it when there's nothing we can do about? I for one, seem to think that he doesn't sound that awkward on the mic anymore. He hasn't bedazzled me by his in-ring prowess and I doubt he'll be doing that anytime soon, not for a prolonged period anyway.

5)Reigns is as good in the ring as Ambrose. He isn't as bad as Cena. I have hated John Cena with a passion for years, notwithstanding the fact of him never losing the title or a match and his superman character. I never liked the way he wrestles, basically his entire moveset- the 5 knuckle absurdity, the AA, the shoulder-knockdown. Even his rapper gimmick and hustle loyalty respect/never back down schtick bored me to death. And after all these years, he's still the same guy. But I think Reigns' moves are still less annoying than 5-knuckle shuffle and that backdrop Cena does.

6) Yet most of you seem to curse him and label him as "bad, or worse". I think he has a set of moves, just like Cena or Batista did. Whether you find them likable or not is entirely up to you. But the moves will never change. He'll never wrestle like a Seth Rollins, Shawn Michaels, or a Daniel Bryan. Naturally, he'll only be who he has been and is, and maybe improve a little, but that's it. Why not revel a little in the victory/title reign of a wrestler who doesn't happen to be a wrestling genius?

7)At least Sheamus isn't champion. We won't really have to endure LON much anymore. (And if the news of Barrett being injured/out is correct, a big yay). If for nothing else, I think we should embrace a little bit of hope owing to LON's demise. And Kevin Owens is still around. The IC title picture hasn't seemed so glorious to me since the Jericho-RVD-Christian feud.

8)And yes, Roman Reigns looks awesome as WWE WHC. Far more awesome(IMO) than John Cena and Hulk baldy Hogan(during his prime) anyway.

 

[Ol'Canucklehead]

Uuuuughhh. Another "why you SHOULD like Roman" post. Sorry. I don't. Sue me. He's boring. Uncharismatic, and I WOULD prefer Sheamus as champion. At least he doesn't sound like he's reading a cue card. I refuse to drink the Kool-Aid. He's just a D-Bag that can't wrestle and puts me to sleep. I would rather they put the belt on Stardust. So yeah. Some people disagree with you. Get over it and stop trying to sell him on us. Do you work for Vince? lol

 

[JoeMallard]

5) You're joking right? Cena has put on multiple MOTY contenders in this year alone. His matches against Bryan and Punk were some of the best wrestling matches of all time. Reigns best matches have been contested under extreme stipulations. To say Reigns is a better wrestler than Cena is laughable!

7) The LON is still going to be prominently featured until Mania, at least. So you're happy when a guy that has far more charisma, better talker and wrestler than Reigns might be injured, TOO BAD he'll be on Smackdown!

8) Some derp face with the worst setup to a finishing move looks like a better champion than Cena? Another laughable comment. Not even a Cena fan, but he wasn't given the key to the city, so to speak, in his first two years, because of who his family is.

Two consecutive days of good booking does not negate the bullshit booking of the last year and a half.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

5) You're joking right? Cena has put on multiple MOTY contenders in this year alone. His matches against Bryan and Punk were some of the best wrestling matches of all time. Reigns best matches have been contested under extreme stipulations. To say Reigns is a better wrestler than Cena is laughable!

No I'm not joking. Since "musclehead/stiff" John Cena's moveset consists of some of the most awkward and non-agile moves in the history of wrestling(5-knuckle shuffle being the most prominent of them, and all those shoulder knock-downs, even his spinebuster), I've never liked him for his wrestling skills. Yes, his matches with Randy Orton, Punk, and Bryan have been excellent. I'm always full of gratitude for those "athletes" who made it all possible. And yes, Roman Reigns is a better wrestler than John Cena because
a)he isn't a bodybuilder/musclehead who wrestles/has been wrestling like a fucking cyborg, and b)he is far less rigid/stiff, example-when he flies for the superman punch, or when he goes running outside when a particular wrestler is leaning onto the bottom ropes, and hits 'em.

7) The LON is still going to be prominently featured until Mania, at least. So you're happy when a guy that has far more charisma, better talker and wrestler than Reigns might be injured, TOO BAD he'll be on Smackdown!

I didn't mean to imply that I was happy merely on account of Barrett being injured. I was happy because I thought maybe Barrett wouldn't have to endure being a sidekick to an utterly drab individual(Sheamus) and continue being a part of a poorly executed LON storyline/group.

8) Some derp face with the worst setup to a finishing move looks like a better champion than Cena? Another laughable comment. Not even a Cena fan, but he wasn't given the key to the city, so to speak, in his first two years, because of who his family is.

How is that laughable? Roman Reigns looks like a chiseled Greek God, has that slightly darkish/tanned complexion, and long black curly-wavy hair. John Cena, on the other hand, is a square-faced musclehead with overly bloated forearms and biceps. Oh, and he's a white American- how unique right?
So yes, The WWE WHC looks far more superb on Roman Reigns than John Cena.

In a similar vein, The Rock, in most people's opinion(especially women), looked hotter/cooler than HHH, Mick Foley, and Steve Austin combined. It's called both charisma and good looks that has to do a whole lot with your genes and physical constitution. I believe at least the majority of women/men would think of The Rock(from 2000-2010) as a superb looker, over Mick Foley, or even HHH. No offence to Mick, though. Do you think that laughable?

You can blame Roman Reigns and The Rock for their genes all you want, but at the end of the day, they looked/look superb as champions. I'm not saying Austin or John Cena are ugly or anything, or that they don't possess charisma. I'm just saying, The WWE WHC looks superb on Reigns, IMO.

And by the way, you calling Reigns a derp-face, whatever derp-face means, is laughable.

Two consecutive days of good booking does not negate the bullshit booking of the last year and a half.

I can't deny that.

 

[achromat666]

It should be worth noting that:

1. Reigns was given the treatment from the IWC by and large because he was originally run roughshod over other people that were perceived as being more deserving and Reigns simply wasn't ready. I'm not going to go so far as to say that he is ready, just that they finally found a way to get him over. Which ultimately means...

2. There's no guarantee that he'll stay that way. The WWE have clearly struggled for a long time to get Roman to this point so if anything perhaps a little cautious optimism might be warranted? But to even go so far as to tell people they need to use terms like hero worship is entirely subjective and dismissing the struggle to get to this point. Roman still has to carry that and this single event doesn't guarantee that he can. It just means the WWE found a way that worked to get him over with the audience.

3. Ambrose, Cesaro, Owens, Neville and a lot of other guys have a far stronger fan reaction, are far stronger in the ring and in the case of Ambrose and Owens especially are far better on the mic. Reigns has yet to (and may never) be as over as Bryan was before his injuries. What separates Reigns from the other guys is the WWE's sustained push of him, not his demonstration of superiority in all areas over everyone else. And it wouldn't be the first time the pushed someone to the moon over more deserving talent.

4. Cena is overall better, and Roman will now have to demonstrate he can do what has made Cena the top face for as long as he has been: The ability to work with any performer and put them over, the ability to deeply connect with the audience and the ability to generate long term interest in the product. Regardless of your opinion of Cena overall (I'm not a fan myself) he's had great matches over a long period with a lot of talent and sells more merch than anyone else on the current roster. And he's done that for over a decade.

There's a difference between being the person that the WWE pushes and backs to get to the top spot and being 'the man'. Rick Flair, Sean Michaels, Steve Austin, C.M. Punk, hell for the past year Seth Rollins were the top stars and carried the brands they represented. John Cena, like it or not, has done the same.

It will be a long time before we see if Reigns can even come close to that. Hell, I still personally hate how stiff Roman is on the mic. Let's not get too deep into celebrating yet. His road is just starting.

 

[BuriedByCena]

I will start cheering for Roman when he grows a backbone, goes off script and starts being a ring general. He is so awkward in the ring. He looks lost all the time. The way he stands and his whole attitude screams "What do I do now?". He walks weird too. When he does moves, he bends weird. He looks like an old man trying to not hurt himself.

He looks like he is literally walking on eggshells all the time in the ring. Add in Tater Tots, Beanstocks and suffering succotashes and you have a real winner!....NOT!

No. I don't have to be nice. No. I don't have to give Roman a chance. WWE is consistant when it comes to failing. Every single time WWE does something right, they purposely gimp their own product. They always mess up and ruin it. Just because Roman had a good day or two doesn't mean anything. Next week on RAW he will once again talk about some guys banana or some other food.

Last week was Tater Tots, this week was prunes, what amazing insult will Roman come up with next? LOL

 

[Un-Bo-Lievable Jeff]

No I'm not joking. Since "musclehead/stiff" John Cena's moveset consists of some of the most awkward and non-agile moves in the history of wrestling(5-knuckle shuffle being the most prominent of them, and all those shoulder knock-downs, even his spinebuster), I've never liked him for his wrestling skills. Yes, his matches with Randy Orton, Punk, and Bryan have been excellent. I'm always full of gratitude for those "athletes" who made it all possible. And yes, Roman Reigns is a better wrestler than John Cena because
a)he isn't a bodybuilder/musclehead who wrestles/has been wrestling like a fucking cyborg, and b)he is far less rigid/stiff, example-when he flies for the superman punch, or when he goes running outside when a particular wrestler is leaning onto the bottom ropes, and hits 'em.



I didn't mean to imply that I was happy merely on account of Barrett being injured. I was happy because I thought maybe Barrett wouldn't have to endure being a sidekick to an utterly drab individual(Sheamus) and continue being a part of a poorly executed LON storyline/group.



How is that laughable? Roman Reigns looks like a chiseled Greek God, has that slightly darkish/tanned complexion, and long black curly-wavy hair. John Cena, on the other hand, is a square-faced musclehead with overly bloated forearms and biceps. Oh, and he's a white American- how unique right?
So yes, The WWE WHC looks far more superb on Roman Reigns than John Cena.

In a similar vein, The Rock, in most people's opinion(especially women), looked hotter/cooler than HHH, Mick Foley, and Steve Austin combined. It's called both charisma and good looks that has to do a whole lot with your genes and physical constitution. I believe at least the majority of women/men would think of The Rock(from 2000-2010) as a superb looker, over Mick Foley, or even HHH. No offence to Mick, though. Do you think that laughable?

You can blame Roman Reigns and The Rock for their genes all you want, but at the end of the day, they looked/look superb as champions. I'm not saying Austin or John Cena are ugly or anything, or that they don't possess charisma. I'm just saying, The WWE WHC looks superb on Reigns, IMO.

And by the way, you calling Reigns a derp-face, whatever derp-face means, is laughable.

Ok, sounds like you have a crush on RR from this post. Settle down.

No, Roman is not a better wrestler than Cena. You may think he is more fluid or whatever but Cena is a better wrestler than Reigns is right now. You've previously been quoted with MOTY several times, and Reigns doesn't come close to that yet. You can be Reigns biggest fan boy, and Cena's biggest hater, but at least admit when you are wrong. Cena is a better wrestler than Reigns is at the moment.

Saying the title looks better on Roman than it does on Cena, again kind of puts me under the opinion you just have a crush on Reigns. By your reasoning, Reigns would be a better champ than Kevin Owens, Ambrose, Cesaro, Bryan and Undertaker just because he looks better holding the belt. This is absolutely no argument for why he should be the face of the company.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

Everyone has their own opinion on Roman Reigns.. Just because he's a young talent that WWE pushes does not mean that everyone has to like him and just because he's a talent that WWE likes doesn't mean that we have to hate him.

At the start of the year, I had a big problem with Reigns winning the Rumble and going on to headline 'Mania, mainly because
a) his booking.
b) the fact that he wasn't even an accomplished singles competitor, plus he was lacking in ring and in the mic.

However his matches against Bryan at Fast Lane, Lesnar at Wrestlemania and Big Show at Extreme Rules, plus his Hell in a Cell match with Bray, proved me wrong about the the in-ring part.

His mic skills are still mehhh, but who (outside the big names) in the current are good talkers? Owens and Rollins only come to mind. The first one debuted 6 months ago and the other one is injured. Reigns, comparing with the rest of the locker room, is a good talker and I can see that he's constantly trying to improve. Every single week.

The only problem left is his booking. I never had a problem with Roman becoming a World Champ, I just didn't want him to become one with his booking of smiley-face good guy. That's why I had suggested to turn the man heel. WWE didn't but instead they decided to let Roman be Roman (of the Shield). Just let the guy wreak havoc.

He sells. He was born to be Champion. Make his booking better and he will be a monster. Plus, he will improve on the mic, he's been improving every single week. Him working with Triple H will only do him good.

 

[Navi]

2)No less than four threads on Roman Reigns have sprung up in the last 48 hours. Most IWC members seem to be experiencing profound revulsion considering how Roman Reigns won the title, and pretty much everything concerning him.

They have sprung up because he is the new champion and that should be no surprise. And it should also be no surprise that a lot of IWC members don't like him, he is a very polarizing figure. I've always been a fan, but I can see where others are coming from. They don't like the way he was pushed right from the Rumble and there has been resentment ever since. That's not going to change anytime soon. Just because he won the title doesn't mean they will like him any better, as a matter of fact I'm seeing the opposite.

3)Most of us had been in concord as to why Roman Reigns sucks as a wrestler and a persona, and nothing seems to have hindered our agreement, until this Raw.

Not all of us have been in agreement, and one RAW doesn't change anything. Yes he's gotten better in the ring, but he has a long way to go. He is still fairly new to this business. I've always maintained he isn't great on the mic, but then he might never be, for some it will never work out. Not everyone is a Bray Wyatt, John Cena or Chris Jericho among others, and they shouldn't be expected to be.

4)Yes, Reigns won. Yes, he's the champion. But why be so negative about it when there's nothing we can do about? I for one, seem to think that he doesn't sound that awkward on the mic anymore. He hasn't bedazzled me by his in-ring prowess and I doubt he'll be doing that anytime soon, not for a prolonged period anyway.

His ring work has always been better than his work on the mic. What Roman Reigns have you been watching all this time?

5)Reigns is as good in the ring as Ambrose. He isn't as bad as Cena. I have hated John Cena with a passion for years, notwithstanding the fact of him never losing the title or a match and his superman character. I never liked the way he wrestles, basically his entire moveset- the 5 knuckle absurdity, the AA, the shoulder-knockdown. Even his rapper gimmick and hustle loyalty respect/never back down schtick bored me to death. And after all these years, he's still the same guy. But I think Reigns' moves are still less annoying than 5-knuckle shuffle and that backdrop Cena does.

First off he is not as good as Ambrose. Ambrose hasn't been allowed to show what he can really do. And are you saying that someone with Ambrose's experience is just the same as someone who's been in the business the length of time Reigns has? And to compare Reigns to Cena is ridiculous. John Cena has carried the WWE on his back for a long time now, Reigns will never reach the heights that Cena has. I doubt anyone will.

6) Yet most of you seem to curse him and label him as "bad, or worse". I think he has a set of moves, just like Cena or Batista did. Whether you find them likable or not is entirely up to you. But the moves will never change. He'll never wrestle like a Seth Rollins, Shawn Michaels, or a Daniel Bryan. Naturally, he'll only be who he has been and is, and maybe improve a little, but that's it. Why not revel a little in the victory/title reign of a wrestler who doesn't happen to be a wrestling genius?

You say he's not a wrestling genius, yet say he's better than Cena. Well Cena can carry a match, he can get the crowd going and on the mic he's fantastic. Stop trying to compare Roman Reigns to anyone else, he is what he is Roman Reigns.

7)At least Sheamus isn't champion. We won't really have to endure LON much anymore. (And if the news of Barrett being injured/out is correct, a big yay). If for nothing else, I think we should embrace a little bit of hope owing to LON's demise. And Kevin Owens is still around. The IC title picture hasn't seemed so glorious to me since the Jericho-RVD-Christian feud.

Yes I can agree at least Sheamus isn't champion anymore.

8)And yes, Roman Reigns looks awesome as WWE WHC. Far more awesome(IMO) than John Cena and Hulk baldy Hogan(during his prime) anyway.

Reigns has the look, and that's what got him in the door in the first place. Let's face facts though, as much as I like the guy, they have pretty much used the entire roster to get him over. That says something right there. I think he'll have a good career, but I don't expect him to be the one to carry the WWE forward once Cena retires. I think it will be Rollins who will do that.

 

[CyberPunk]

Roman Reigns has had 2 good night's. 2 nights of good booking doesn't suddenly erase all that he has to improve. I want to remain cautiously optimistic, but with WWE's track record, they may find a way to screw this all up. Moreover, he just won the WWE WHC. He's long way from proving that he can keep people invested in him for long periods of time.

All I am hoping for at this time is they shouldn't undo everything they've done in last 2 days. It, no way, shape, or form means that Reigns is out of the woods. Comparing him to Cena at this point would be simply asinine.

 

[SuperTaco]

Dude, Ambrose could wrestle circles around Reigns if he was allowed to. You lost me there. Also, Reigns has not wrestled a 5 star match with anyone yet, while Cena has had plenty (His first match with Owens as an example). I would not consider Reigns' match with Lesnar a 5 star, because it was just a finisher fest on a bigger stage.

This entire thread just screams "You need to like Reigns because I like Reigns"

 

[Jack-Hammer]

A small point before moving onto the subject at hand. This thread lost any credibility when you basically said that John Cena can't wrestle. You can dislike Cena all you want, no matter who you are, but to say that he can't wrestle is an idiotic statement of titanic proportions. Cena has had classics against a BROAD variety of opponents of different styles, strengths and weaknesses. It takes two in order to make a great wrestling match, it's another fact that blind haters of John Cena conveniently ignore whenever it suits them.

To say that Roman Reigns isn't a "musclehead", to quote the OP....umm... have you actually bothered to even look at him. He's a 250 pound stud with 20' arms and a ton of muscular definition. Reigns has come a good, long way in the handful of years he's actually been wrestling and I hope he continues to do well as I've enjoyed him since his Shield days. However, how exactly has Reigns shown himself to be more agile than John Cena? I mean, is it because he jumps maybe a foot off the ground to hit a Superman Punch or maybe a little less than 2 feet when he delivers the Drive By to a guy draped over the bottom rope? By that logic, then Luke Harper looks like Neville by comparison as he's shown to be able to do a pretty damn decent dropkick.

I know the OP has had a serious crush on Roman Reigns for quite a while, but Reigns had one very good night and people just aren't going to jump on the band wagon after having one good night. Reigns was doing great when he was beating people up and he did, at best, decent when he was talking on the mic; it was still pretty obvious that he's still more than a bit awkward when it comes to mic work, but he's better than he used to be so I give him credit for that. As I said, I'm a fan of the guy and I hope he continues to do well and improve along the way, but he still has a good deal of work to do before people embrace him as the new "face" of WWE.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Actually I find the OP's thread quite hilarious considering this was part of his thread he created a short time ago:

And then I thought of how Punk resented the fact that even though he WAS one of the mainevents of Wrestlemania 28 as a defending champion, he never got to close the show..and I wondered if he ever would have gotten to end Wrestlemania, had he been around still...it could've been against anyone...HHH, Cesaro, Bryan, Rollins, even the dreaded and godforsaken Roman Reigns.

Pretty funny considering that came from a thread that he started this very month. While he admits in this OP that Reigns isn't perfect, that quote is a far cry from the gushing he's doing now.

While I too have enjoyed the recent booking of Reigns, it's still too new to tell if they'll be able to keep his hot streak going. While I've been a fan of his for a long while, I've always known that he isn't perfect. His booking the last year, up until recently of course, has been pretty terrible. I do try to have optimism that they'll keep it up, but WWE has not instilled a lot of faith in me.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Why not revel a little in the victory/title reign of a wrestler who doesn't happen to be a wrestling genius?

See the line of the OP I chose to accent? That's the way I feel about the subject; it's more fun (for me) to enjoy what I'm seeing on the TV screen than to pick everything apart and come off as genuinely offended the next day on this forum, as so many do. The OP is providing an alternative, which is good.

One forum member said to me in a IM: "Sally, you're just not as discerning an observer as the rest of us."

Well, maybe I'm not, but I think I'm getting a lot more enjoyment out of the product than many of the good folks on this board......and believe it or not, that's why I'm a pro wrestling fan.

Actually, I have my negative feelings about things being presented, but I try to take the show as a whole; Raw is a 3-hour program: it's only natural that the viewer won't like all the segments.......and if you don't like any of 'em, it might be time to find something else to do with your Monday nights if it's torturing you that badly.

Personally, I think John Cena and Roman Reigns are really good at what they do. Am I saying they're perfect?.........hardly, but I'd rather concentrate on what I like than what I don't.

Reading the OP's message at the start of this topic, I have mixed feelings; on one hand, he seems to be saying 'the product stinks but we might as well try to enjoy it when something good happens'......and on the other hand, he seems to be advocating the idea of looking on the bright side as a rule.

Personally, I'll take the latter view.

 

[AttitudeChild]

You can't simply tell people to like someone because they're "supposed to like him". Now I will say that the Roman Reigns CHARACTER isn't the problem. The character is someone I wouldn't mind getting behind and rooting for. The problem is the PERFORMER. Joe Anoa'i doesn't have the skill set to bring the Roman Reigns character to life in a believable way. Whenever he cuts a promo it's painfully obvious that you're just watching a performer portray a character. No matter how well written and developed a character might be, if the performer can't deliver then you can't connect with what's going on. I'll give an example.

One of the most beloved characters of ALL TIME is Batman. There are very few people who don't love him. He's even become the "default" superhero, taking that title from Superman in recent years. But for however great that character is, no one is going to pay money to go see The Dark Knight starring ROB SCHNEIDER. You can just trow a red cape on DANE COOK and say,"Here's SUPERMAN! Love him!" No, that's not how it works. It's up to Joe, the performer, to bring the character to life in a believable way and he simply hasn't. Like Rob Schneider in a Batman mask, he just looks out of place trying to be this person that he obviously isn't. That's why fans don't cheer him.

 

[Azane]

Until Roman dispalys enough to make me forget "Tater tots, haha!", I can't take him seriously, He's on Santino level in my mind still, and "He's not as awkward" anymore, Tater Tots was last week, Like, I think Tater Tot is going to be Wrestling slang for a blown promo.

I can't be optimistic, I've seen them piss away some of the greatest angles and talents in the world, NXT is where I look to be optimistic. I'd still root for Sheamus over Roman right now.

and ya, Cena's aging like Wine, even the most stalwart Cena haters are giving him credit he deserves as WWE has let him evolve his move set a little.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

1)With so many responses, and most of them being glaring how-dare-you-ask-me-to-like-roman-reigns , I hardly know where to begin. But begin I shall by dispelling a notion- NO, THIS WAS NEVER A "WHY YOU SHOULD LIKE ROMAN REIGNS" THREAD. If you re-read it, my one and only major point was,- and I did preface that point by admitting that we all thought/agreed that Reigns wasn't half as good/agile a wrestler as Cesaro/Rollins/Bryan, that his mic skills had improved, but he was far from perfect/thoroughly entertaining- , since Rollins/Cesaro/Bryan are out, and Sheamus as a champion even sucked worse, why not just revel a little bit in Roman Reigns' victory and reign, at least for a week or two, if not forever?

2)But obviously, most of you immediately went about with your "how-dare-you" responses. I get that. You've made your mind. You don't like Reigns and don't intend to. But I wasn't advocating Roman Reigns should be your favourite wrestler of all time, to begin with. And to dispel another notion, that ridiculous and hilarious one- of my being a Roman Reigns fan/having a crush...yes, I think Reigns looks HOT, even Godly, and like it or not, all of our girlfriends will collectively agree for us, but my favourite wrestlers, if I had to choose, I couldn't even decide the top 10. But it certainly would include Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Benoit, Punk, Sting, The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Seth Rollins, and to a lesser extent- The Rock, Randy Orton, and Kevin Owens(I am yet to see much of KO). So where's Reigns? Oh, and I almost had forgotten BRET HART.

3)My personal, subjective opinion of John Cena is that he is terrible in the ring, he is rigid, and I've cherished that opinion since 2004. It's not even his fault, it's just the way he moves, the way his body is. He WAS a gym rat and unlike Lex Luger, he couldn't even do suplexes and body slams that would make me go "wow". And Luger had that press slam he'd do even on The Big Show. Yes, so subjectively speaking, I think Reigns is a better wrestler because he is less rigid, IMO. His moveset is far less annoying(if annoyingness admits of degrees), even though I dislike the superman punch. To me, it's still better than 5-knuckle shuffle and pretty much all of Cena's signature moves. Has Cena given us numerous "good" to "awesome" matches? Yes, he has. I thank Punk, Batista, and most of all, Randy Orton, for making that happen. Even Goldberg has had a few good matches. But I doubt Goldberg was ever a superb wrestler. And even Goldberg was better than Cena when it came to execution of the few moves he knew- press slam, jackhammer, spear. I could go on to say the same about Batista being a better wrestler, but I hope you see where I'm coming from.

4) @Fire Marshall Bill, I'm glad you found it hilarious. No, I'm not the biggest Roman Reigns fan out there, far from it. I referred to him as dreaded and godforsaken because I felt so. I still refer to Sheamus as that. And I'll be referring to the Miz as a dork for centuries to come. That doesn't mean I change my opinions every single day. Even though, I had been as bored/pessimistic about Rollins being out, and Reigns/Sheamus being utterly boring- just as you guys had been- I felt different this monday. I didn't even watch TLC but read the results. On monday, I just felt this change in perception when Reigns came out. I seemed to enjoy him on the mic(when previously I was as rigid as ya'll in my belief "Reigns is boring, hence I won't allow myself to thoroughly enjoy this segment". For the first time in years, I was actually invested in a segment and the match itself. So yes, when Reigns won, I felt this joy that I hadn't in forever. It doesn't make me the biggest Roman Reigns fan out there, it just means, I derived a bit of pleasure/thrill from an episode of RAW.

5)But as expected, only and only Sally understood the whole point of the thread. To sum up for all of you diehard Reigns haters, "Let's be kids again and revel in Reigns' victory".

6)Finally, @Jackhammer. Even though I'm not an expert on Slang/Urban dictionary usage, I believe there's a difference between a musclehead/gym rat, and a Roman Reigns. The former being someone like Ryback, and John Cena. Hasn't John Cena being a former bodybuilder and gym rat sort of hindered his wrestling ability? Just look at his forearms. That's what happens when you lift all those weights for years. They're HUGE. But they also result in a wrestler not being able to be as fluit/athletic as Randy Orton, let alone Shawn Michaels or Seth Rollins. Now go ahead and tell me John is/was as good in the ring, as agile as Orton? You can't.

There's someone even worse than Cena. He's known as Ryback. The guy's body just won't permit him to be as agile/flexible, notwithstanding the fact that he just sucks when it comes to pro wrestling, both in terms of in-ring psychology and execution. Roman Reigns might be muscular but he surely isn't a bodybuilder, nor a gym rat. Even Brock Lesnar wasn't. The difference between a gymrat and guys like Lesnar/Shawn Michaels/Reigns is that they workout in the gym but focus more on things like endurance, speed, and so on. And Lesnar being a fucking awesome athlete(like Angle) isn't even debatable. I'm not an expert on sports and nutrition and all, but this much, I do understand. Reigns isn't a musclehead. Is he a stud/muscular? Yes.

 

[AegonTargaryen]

Reigns has the look, and that's what got him in the door in the first place. Let's face facts though, as much as I like the guy, they have pretty much used the entire roster to get him over. That says something right there. I think he'll have a good career, but I don't expect him to be the one to carry the WWE forward once Cena retires. I think it will be Rollins who will do that.

If that happens, Rollins being the one to carry the company, no one would be happier than I. I only got back to regularly watching the WWE since October, so I pretty much missed out on everything that happened with The Shield post-breakup, and consequently, missed out on Rollins.

I've said this before in some other threads, Rollins is the best thing WWE has had in years. Even though likening a wrestler to some other wrestler is perceived as absurd, I can't stop likening him to Shawn Michaels. To me, and this means none of the wrestlers in the past were really eligible for this, Seth Rollins is a modern-day Shawn Michaels. Even his upperbody is built like Michaels'. The way he moves, runs, wrestles reminds me of Michaels. It only means one thing. Seth Rollins is superbly talented/capable. He has the look. I love his mic work. I just love Seth Rollins and if he's the guy that carries the company or is champion, I'm going to have nothing to complain.

 

[d_henderson1810]

I will start cheering for Roman when he grows a backbone, goes off script and starts being a ring general. He is so awkward in the ring. He looks lost all the time. The way he stands and his whole attitude screams "What do I do now?". He walks weird too. When he does moves, he bends weird. He looks like an old man trying to not hurt himself.

He looks like he is literally walking on eggshells all the time in the ring. Add in Tater Tots, Beanstocks and suffering succotashes and you have a real winner!....NOT!

No. I don't have to be nice. No. I don't have to give Roman a chance. WWE is consistant when it comes to failing. Every single time WWE does something right, they purposely gimp their own product. They always mess up and ruin it. Just because Roman had a good day or two doesn't mean anything. Next week on RAW he will once again talk about some guys banana or some other food.

Last week was Tater Tots, this week was prunes, what amazing insult will Roman come up with next? LOL

Yet if "Stone Cold" Steve Austin or Daniel Bryan used "tetertots" as an insult, you'd laugh your head off.

 

[d_henderson1810]

You can't simply tell people to like someone because they're "supposed to like him". Now I will say that the Roman Reigns CHARACTER isn't the problem. The character is someone I wouldn't mind getting behind and rooting for. The problem is the PERFORMER. Joe Anoa'i doesn't have the skill set to bring the Roman Reigns character to life in a believable way. Whenever he cuts a promo it's painfully obvious that you're just watching a performer portray a character. No matter how well written and developed a character might be, if the performer can't deliver then you can't connect with what's going on. I'll give an example.

One of the most beloved characters of ALL TIME is Batman. There are very few people who don't love him. He's even become the "default" superhero, taking that title from Superman in recent years. But for however great that character is, no one is going to pay money to go see The Dark Knight starring ROB SCHNEIDER. You can just trow a red cape on DANE COOK and say,"Here's SUPERMAN! Love him!" No, that's not how it works. It's up to Joe, the performer, to bring the character to life in a believable way and he simply hasn't. Like Rob Schneider in a Batman mask, he just looks out of place trying to be this person that he obviously isn't. That's why fans don't cheer him.

But the very reason the IWC HATE someone is because you are told to like them.

You people can never admit that Vince got it right pushing someone, can you? You can't be seen to agree with him. No, you pretend that the crowd "gets them over". The crowd get "no-one over". They just cheer for who the other sheep in the crowd cheer for, and boo the rest.

If someone on here told most of you to stand on your head, you'd do it, since you are such mindless sheep who can't admit to liking different people than everyone else here.

If you like Roman Reigns on here, just say so, and screw what any jealous loser on here thinks.

 

[Rayne]

Yet if "Stone Cold" Steve Austin or Daniel Bryan used "tetertots" as an insult, you'd laugh your head off.

It is not the ability to say a word that makes someone an actor. It is the ability to deliver those words in a convincing manner that makes someone an actor. Take The Rock; he was able to take a silly word like 'jabroni' and sell it to the point where it became an everyday phrase. Take Steve Austin and Daniel Bryan; they worked as actors because they knew that they didn't have the particular skill set to make words larger than their meaning, and so conspicuously avoided doing that. If Stone Cold Steve Austin had tried to come up by calling Bret Hart "Canadian Bacon", we wouldn't have Steve Austin.

Roman Reigns hasn't worked long term, because when he's out saying "suffering succotash" or calling people "tatertots", he's not the kind of guy that can sell that to people. (It's a rare talent.) They've recently gone back to what got him over as a member of the SHIELD- beating the hell out of people- and it's working, because it plays to the skills he has as an actor.

 

[whalip15]

Lets get thsi done with, Reigns is WHC, whether he was been booke dpoorly or not in the past is not his fault! Thats like us gettign the blame when our boss does a rubbish job! Hes champion so at least give him a chance and embrace him! He has been booked spot on the last two nights (TLC and Raw) and this should have been happening previously, but didnt. Get over it! As for the Reigns and Cena debate come off it. How can you even compare a seasoned pro to a relatively new sueprstar. Remember how poor cena came across back in the day of his thug life gimmick. Give Reigns a chance to prove hes worthy. Obviously i like Reigns, but that means nothing. I didnt like cena for a long while but after some of his matches recently he's growing on me. However, back to Reigns. I see a lot of people saying he cant wrestle of hes stiff etc. He's built that way, hes always going to have to utilise a certain moveset! I dont see anyone bashing Brock Lesnar!? Which leads me to my next point.....Reigns obviosuly struggles a bit with the mic, some people get it soem people dont, some people develop, some never do. Thats the way it is, but what i think he's screaming out for is a 'Paul Heyman'! Continue the powerhouse build because its Reigns all over, lets see him dismantle a few people and become unstoppable have the authority panic and bring in Brock Lesnar, have Brock go against heyman and side with authority, so Heyman backs Reigns corner. Brock v Reigns wrestlemania rematch something brutal like iron man match / last man standing....Reigns wil llearn loads fro mahvign heyman as his mic guy....plus he can still feed in a bit like lesnar does. But ultimately it'll give hi ma wealth of knowledge.

Going back to TLC i thought it was a bit cringe when you could hear HHH shouting 'again' at Reigns, but all that comes with experience, nobody walks into a job and is perfect, its a learning process and Reigns is finally on the right curve.

He should get as man ymatches as possible under his belt, and give his all for each one. Sack off the superman punch because i think its a weak finishign move. Id much rather see a 'Roman Empire Powerbomb' or the likes. The one on sheamus where he deadlifted him was perfect.

Reigns didnt ask, plead or beg to be put in this position so dont hold it against him. Will he be the right man movign forward, maybe, maybe not but we'll never know unless he gets a chance and it wont help if everyone is on his back because his boss done a poor job!

 

[Mustang Sally]

I will start cheering for Roman when he grows a backbone, goes off script and starts being a ring general.

Goes off script? If he does that, won't he wind up working for a minor wrestling company, performing in front of 23 fans in junior high school gyms in West Virginia? That the fans might appreciate Roman's 'rebel' act sure wouldn't guarantee that Vince McMahon will feel the same. Let's not confuse kayfabe with real life.

Taken as a whole, though, it's true the company has perhaps made too much of an effort to get Roman over. They made the wise decision to stall his push right before WM31 because he was developing more slowly than they had initially hoped, but they still obviously felt he was the guy of the future ......and sure enough, he's improved tremendously in the ring & on the mic, even though there are fans that refuse to give him credit for either.

Does that mean he's perfect? Hell no, but I don't think there will be just one performer who takes us to the next decade. There will be a few of 'em,and I believe Roman Reigns should be among them.

 

[L@RISANO]

Goes off script? If he does that, won't he wind up working for a minor wrestling company, performing in front of 23 fans in junior high school gyms in West Virginia? That the fans might appreciate Roman's 'rebel' act sure wouldn't guarantee that Vince McMahon will feel the same. Let's not confuse kayfabe with real life.

Taken as a whole, though, it's true the company has perhaps made too much of an effort to get Roman over. They made the wise decision to stall his push right before WM31 because he was developing more slowly than they had initially hoped, but they still obviously felt he was the guy of the future ......and sure enough, he's improved tremendously in the ring & on the mic, even though there are fans that refuse to give him credit for either.

Does that mean he's perfect? Hell no, but I don't think there will be just one performer who takes us to the next decade. There will be a few of 'em,and I believe Roman Reigns should be among them.

Well said. I don't foresee any single performer taking the WWE through the next decade at all. At present, I think both Roman Reigns and Seth Rollins have 'made it' to being Main Event talents in today's WWE alongside the current Big 3 of: John Cena, Brock Lesnar and Randy Orton.

Who will join them will soon be revealed. I'm seeing Kevin Owens as a huge possibility as the next guy to be elevated, probably as a candidate for Top Heel.
Questions remain with regards to Dean Ambrose, as I find it unclear as to how WWE views him in the long term. At present, I see career midcard/upper midcard type, ditto Bray Wyatt and his family.


Beyond them; I see Finn Balor, Apollo Crews and most of all, Sami Zayn(next Daniel Bryan, lMO) as guys who will get big pushes eventually.


I remain optimistic about the WWE's future, as there is definitely a very talented group of Superstars on the roster, many of them relatively young as well. WWE's job is to continue giving us programming as they did this past Monday night, and I am sure I won't be the only one 'looking forward' to watching many Monday night RAWs in the future.

 

[Cats Pajamas]

1)2)No less than four threads on Roman Reigns have sprung up in the last 48 hours.

There has been quite a few Reigns threads… I’m starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel of my Reigns puns. The surplus of Reigns threads speaks volumes to the amount of interest his title win has generated; it’s a far better reaction than when Sheamus picked up the gold, that's for sure. I’m not going to lie, Reigns winning gold has my attention as well.

For 18 months, Creative has sent Roman Reigns out to the ring despite the obvious flaw of having NO personality. I’m assuming they had every intention of “figuring out” the Roman Reigns character as they went along, but, that had not been happening. “Suffering Succotash” was a cry for help from WWE Creative… “tater tot” was an admission of defeat. There’s almost a year between those two promos, and it was clear they’d made zero progress on Roman’s character development. It made it worse that Joe A’noai couldn’t hide the fact that he just doesn’t understand wrestling:

"I don't think I'm headbutting with [hardcore fans], I feel like they are headbutting me. [...] One thing that kind of confuses me is that it is a performance, it is a show, there is a storyline. When people start doing the 'He deserves this, He deserves that', really did Brad Pitt deserved [sic] to be Achilles in Troy?".

Yes, Joe… it’s a freaking show (but you're not Brad Pitt). Your championship is a freaking prop and the matches are pre-determined. None of this really matters, yet for some reason, we’re still watching! Show some freaking enthusiasm for your role on this show! Act like you give a shit when you're out there! Why, you ask?

Spoiler

Because that’s your freaking job, Chippawa! That big gold belt means you're supposed to be the creme de la creme, not watered down!

I’ll give credit to Vince McMahon, who takes a lot of criticism from the IWC for never being able to stick with one thing and always changing plans last minute. He made a decision years ago Reigns was going to be a champion and, even though it proved to be a crappy idea, he stuck with it. Monday Night Raw and TLC gave us some hope, but I still have my reservations on Reigns. He stunk up the show on too many Monday nights for me to forgive him after two decent nights.