stingray11214
Cena is no Bruno & Cole is no Solie
I saw this on a Facebook page. So, I am going to be very simple and to the point. Who was the better WWE Champion? Jinder Mahal or Roman Reigns? Very simple question. Or, is it? Vote and discuss.
Jinder or Roman? Who was the better WWE World Champion?
- Thread starter stingray11214
- Start date
It's kinda hard because both didn't start their respective title reigns in a great way, it's hard to pick which was the better. But i have to pick Jinder over Reigns mostly because it the title Help Jinder's character to grow more then Reigns. Roman's title reigns last title reigns we're pretty much match of the year candidate with Aj styles and Seth Rollins but we have to remember is first 2 as well which we're awful and pretty much lead to the destruction of the roman reigns babyface character they we're trying to push at the time.
In comparison, Jinder's title reign was boring and predictable but made jinder a bigger Heel in the process and he's went from a jobber to a pretty good mid card heel with the title reigns so putting the title on him help him grow as a performer and that's what a title is suppose to do in the end
So that's why i feel like Jinder mahal was a better champion then Reigns, not because of the quality of the match or the performers themselves but how the title reigns help them grow as performers.
In comparison, Jinder's title reign was boring and predictable but made jinder a bigger Heel in the process and he's went from a jobber to a pretty good mid card heel with the title reigns so putting the title on him help him grow as a performer and that's what a title is suppose to do in the end
So that's why i feel like Jinder mahal was a better champion then Reigns, not because of the quality of the match or the performers themselves but how the title reigns help them grow as performers.
Macho Mans Beard
'The Bringer of Rain'
Jinder Mahal!!!
Though I was worried whe they put the title on him, cause I felt he would not be very good. But he surprised me. To be a heel is one thing, but to be a heel Champion takes some solid talent. You can tell he had some good help from VKM. It helped round his character and draw massive heat. Plus having the Bollywood Boys help him in mathes helped to make it entertaining. Yes they interfered but that is what they are supposed to do.
Roman Reigns always seemed very bland. And you could always tell the crowd werent behind him as Champion. I think a lot had to do with WWE being to predictable with him as Champion. We knew months before it happen. (Which is why dirt sheets suck) With Mahal we really didnt get that, it was more organic of a win and shocked a lot of people/fans. Which also made Mahals character more organic.
Romans other problem is his mic work, which fans hate him for. He is flat out terrible. Mahals mic work is pretty solid (7 out of 10 IMO) Which helps him a lot in building a fued.
Though I was worried whe they put the title on him, cause I felt he would not be very good. But he surprised me. To be a heel is one thing, but to be a heel Champion takes some solid talent. You can tell he had some good help from VKM. It helped round his character and draw massive heat. Plus having the Bollywood Boys help him in mathes helped to make it entertaining. Yes they interfered but that is what they are supposed to do.
Roman Reigns always seemed very bland. And you could always tell the crowd werent behind him as Champion. I think a lot had to do with WWE being to predictable with him as Champion. We knew months before it happen. (Which is why dirt sheets suck) With Mahal we really didnt get that, it was more organic of a win and shocked a lot of people/fans. Which also made Mahals character more organic.
Romans other problem is his mic work, which fans hate him for. He is flat out terrible. Mahals mic work is pretty solid (7 out of 10 IMO) Which helps him a lot in building a fued.
I took Roman because while Jinder had the better overall character, Roman had the better storylines and matches. His two matches with A.J Styles were really well done and matches I've always found to be slightly underrated.
Yes, ratings were in the toilet during his reign; but then again, they were like that with Mahal; and seeing how much he's improved since, I would imagine another run as world champ would be much better in terms of ratings.
Yes, ratings were in the toilet during his reign; but then again, they were like that with Mahal; and seeing how much he's improved since, I would imagine another run as world champ would be much better in terms of ratings.
Jack-Hammer
YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
Neither guy exactly blew my socks off but Roman Reigns was vastly better in my mind. I've maintained that there are a lot of wrestlers on the roster with more overall ability than Roman Reigns, but Jinder Mahal isn't one of them. Jinder's lack of talent was accentuated by having what passes in the modern age as a long title run, but a long run was necessary in order for fans to see whether he would sink or swim and Jinder sank like the Titanic. Why did he sink? Because he's just not all that good in my opinion.
Wrestling is subjective, what some may like others may very well hate and I think the post above me from Macho Mans Beard is an example of that. I've never been a huge Reigns fan but, in my mind, he's head and shoulders above Jinder and where Reigns has had problems in some areas, he has improved upon them while Jinder has remained the same level of mediocrity. Inside the ring, on his best day, Jinder is average; the only reason why so many were looking forward to his matches was the hope of seeing him lose. On the mic, he's also average, at the very most, and he spent most of his time as champion delivering the same promo week after week; if you heard one Jinder promo, you heard them all. As a character, he was flat out uninteresting to me as I just never bought into Jinder in the role of an angry foreigner to the degree that I "disliked" him for trashing my country. The only thing about Jinder that's above average is his physique, the guy's shredded to the bone with lean muscle even though he hasn't really gained all that much muscle mass. When Jinder left WWE, he was probably around 225 lbs. and he's probably around 235 or so now that's packed onto a naturally tall, lanky sort of frame.
For both their runs, ratings were pretty much in the crapper though more so for Reigns than Jinder, though this was before the brand split and all the pressure was on Raw to perform. Neither guy was a great ratings draw as WWE Champion, attendance to live shows was also down as fans will sometimes find a way to let WWE know if they don't like something. Reigns' character wasn't much to speak on, and at least Jinder did have a character, but what Reigns did have were the storylines and the better matches. Reigns consistently put on strong matches with a variety of opponents and the one really good match Jinder Mahal had was against AJ Styles, which was made all the better in the eyes of many fans because Jinder lost the WWE Championship to someone who is infinitely more skilled and more over than Mahal has ever thought of being. Why was the title taken off Jinder? Because fan interest in Jinder Mahal as WWE Champion had reached an all time low, so low in fact that there was practically zero positive buzz regarding his match against Brock Lesnar at Survivor Series. When you have a first ever meeting in a champion vs. champion match between two men holding internationally recognized World Championships at one of the biggest wrestling shows of the year and fans couldn't care less, it means there's a problem with one or both of the champions. While I, and a lot of others, haven't been exactly happy with Brock Lesnar, the ultimate part timer, as a World Champion again, the fact remains that lots of other people are always interested in Lesnar's matches, that's been especially true over the last 4 or 5 months when you look at the match he had with Reigns, Strowman & Joe and in his singles bouts with Joe & Strowman because they've actually been competitive matches worth watching instead of a 4 minute trip to Suplex City. So, that left Jinder Mahal and look what happened with fan interest in Lesnar's Survivor Series match once Jinder lost the title: it skyrocketed because the odds of Lesnar having a great pro wrestling match were guaranteed considering that his opponent was someone who's been widely considered one of the best in-ring wrestlers in the world for the last 15 years in AJ Styles.
Wrestling is subjective, what some may like others may very well hate and I think the post above me from Macho Mans Beard is an example of that. I've never been a huge Reigns fan but, in my mind, he's head and shoulders above Jinder and where Reigns has had problems in some areas, he has improved upon them while Jinder has remained the same level of mediocrity. Inside the ring, on his best day, Jinder is average; the only reason why so many were looking forward to his matches was the hope of seeing him lose. On the mic, he's also average, at the very most, and he spent most of his time as champion delivering the same promo week after week; if you heard one Jinder promo, you heard them all. As a character, he was flat out uninteresting to me as I just never bought into Jinder in the role of an angry foreigner to the degree that I "disliked" him for trashing my country. The only thing about Jinder that's above average is his physique, the guy's shredded to the bone with lean muscle even though he hasn't really gained all that much muscle mass. When Jinder left WWE, he was probably around 225 lbs. and he's probably around 235 or so now that's packed onto a naturally tall, lanky sort of frame.
For both their runs, ratings were pretty much in the crapper though more so for Reigns than Jinder, though this was before the brand split and all the pressure was on Raw to perform. Neither guy was a great ratings draw as WWE Champion, attendance to live shows was also down as fans will sometimes find a way to let WWE know if they don't like something. Reigns' character wasn't much to speak on, and at least Jinder did have a character, but what Reigns did have were the storylines and the better matches. Reigns consistently put on strong matches with a variety of opponents and the one really good match Jinder Mahal had was against AJ Styles, which was made all the better in the eyes of many fans because Jinder lost the WWE Championship to someone who is infinitely more skilled and more over than Mahal has ever thought of being. Why was the title taken off Jinder? Because fan interest in Jinder Mahal as WWE Champion had reached an all time low, so low in fact that there was practically zero positive buzz regarding his match against Brock Lesnar at Survivor Series. When you have a first ever meeting in a champion vs. champion match between two men holding internationally recognized World Championships at one of the biggest wrestling shows of the year and fans couldn't care less, it means there's a problem with one or both of the champions. While I, and a lot of others, haven't been exactly happy with Brock Lesnar, the ultimate part timer, as a World Champion again, the fact remains that lots of other people are always interested in Lesnar's matches, that's been especially true over the last 4 or 5 months when you look at the match he had with Reigns, Strowman & Joe and in his singles bouts with Joe & Strowman because they've actually been competitive matches worth watching instead of a 4 minute trip to Suplex City. So, that left Jinder Mahal and look what happened with fan interest in Lesnar's Survivor Series match once Jinder lost the title: it skyrocketed because the odds of Lesnar having a great pro wrestling match were guaranteed considering that his opponent was someone who's been widely considered one of the best in-ring wrestlers in the world for the last 15 years in AJ Styles.
Kodo Sawaki
Championship Contender
Roman because t least he had good matches. Tell me one memorable Jinder match? Before he lost to AJ he had Orton and Nakamura. He won both by Singh brothers interfere. He had arguable 2 most technical wrestlers on roster and managed to have mediocre at best matches. That is just inexcusable and no wonder WWE gave up from him at the time because even they saw how mediocre at best he was and how Indian demographics isnt going up so they took belt from him.
You can say a lot about Reigns. How he doesnt connect with certain portion of crowd, how his promos are not that good, but he delivered when it comes to matches. Even one of those AJ matches is more then enough to trample anything Ginger Indian has ever done in WWE. Because cheer or boo people care what Reigns do. Nobody cares what Jinder does.
You can say a lot about Reigns. How he doesnt connect with certain portion of crowd, how his promos are not that good, but he delivered when it comes to matches. Even one of those AJ matches is more then enough to trample anything Ginger Indian has ever done in WWE. Because cheer or boo people care what Reigns do. Nobody cares what Jinder does.
TakeTheSting
Dark Match Winner
I absolutely hated it when Jinder won the title, but have to admit, he played his heel champion role well. However I hope they don’t take the strap off Styles just for the India tour, but I’m afraid that’ll happen
I could still never get past the suspension of disbelief for Jinder’s reign. On one hand, it’s portrayed as a sport and upsets do happen. But those stories work much better with faces.
He just never clicked. His promos, matches and storylines were all boring. Reigns was much better IMO.
He just never clicked. His promos, matches and storylines were all boring. Reigns was much better IMO.
MillionDollarMan
Occasional Pre-Show
The thing is, most wrestlers aren't considered legitimate till their 2nd or 3rd championship. Do you remember HHH's first reign? It was a joke. Very few can win it like Cena did and make it seem legitimate.
Every Jericho and his first run which was becoming undisputed champ and beating Austin and the Rock in one night turned into him walking Stephanie's dog and made him pathetic.
On that note, I'm voting Jinder just because he's gotten more of the heat the WWE is trying to get. He's at least successful as a heel. Roman sucks as a face champ.
Every Jericho and his first run which was becoming undisputed champ and beating Austin and the Rock in one night turned into him walking Stephanie's dog and made him pathetic.
On that note, I'm voting Jinder just because he's gotten more of the heat the WWE is trying to get. He's at least successful as a heel. Roman sucks as a face champ.
Yes, that was the biggest problem. It's difficult to have someone in the Job Squad 2.0 one week and then champion the next week.
Mahal could be believable in the long term, but it was done way too quickly.
You've got to be joking. Is this really even a question?
Roman Reigns is the better World Heavyweight Champion. Fans may not like how forced his push is but at least the guy is believable as a top tier contender. Roman Reigns was the enforcer of The Shield, one of the most popular factions in years. Jinder Mahal was the guy who couldn't even fit in to 3MB. He went from jobbing to other jobbers, to suddenly getting a random push straight to the World Heavyweight Championship in hopes that he would generate fan interest in India. The guy was never believable in the slightest as a World Champion. I'm not the biggest Reigns supporter around here, however even I can tell you he is infinitely better than Jinder.
Roman Reigns is the better World Heavyweight Champion. Fans may not like how forced his push is but at least the guy is believable as a top tier contender. Roman Reigns was the enforcer of The Shield, one of the most popular factions in years. Jinder Mahal was the guy who couldn't even fit in to 3MB. He went from jobbing to other jobbers, to suddenly getting a random push straight to the World Heavyweight Championship in hopes that he would generate fan interest in India. The guy was never believable in the slightest as a World Champion. I'm not the biggest Reigns supporter around here, however even I can tell you he is infinitely better than Jinder.
Richard Blonoff
Make America Rassle Again
Roman with ease.
There are some people who will talk about how much Jinder improved and all that and they aren't wrong. The issue is that if you start with a shit sandwich and put a piece of ham and cheese on in, it still contains shit. That is what they did with Jinder. For the record, Jinder in 3MB was great. 3MB was great in general. I didn't even hate Jinder when he came back all roided up and got a few wins here and there. The issue is that Jinder is about as bland as you can get. Nothing about him stands out. Throwing the Singh brothers in with him didn't improve him. He cuts the same promo each week about being Indian and being the Maharajah, wrestles the same match each PPV, and manages to get people to sit on their hands the entire time. He is so average it physically hurts me to watch him. If I wasn't feeling those stomach pains from watching him wrestle, I'd fall asleep because his matches are so predictable. He gets some offense early, starts to get in trouble, the face starts to make their comeback, the Singh brothers run distraction, and his shitty cobra clutch slam gets the pin after about ten minutes. It's how each match played out. The best part of his entire reign was when Orton nearly killed the Singh brothers throwing them onto tables.
When Roman has a match, it feels like a big deal. No one on the roster, save maybe Cena, has that aura. Each match Roman is in feels like a big fight. They are usually fairly entertaining as well. That alone makes him better than Jinder.
There are some people who will talk about how much Jinder improved and all that and they aren't wrong. The issue is that if you start with a shit sandwich and put a piece of ham and cheese on in, it still contains shit. That is what they did with Jinder. For the record, Jinder in 3MB was great. 3MB was great in general. I didn't even hate Jinder when he came back all roided up and got a few wins here and there. The issue is that Jinder is about as bland as you can get. Nothing about him stands out. Throwing the Singh brothers in with him didn't improve him. He cuts the same promo each week about being Indian and being the Maharajah, wrestles the same match each PPV, and manages to get people to sit on their hands the entire time. He is so average it physically hurts me to watch him. If I wasn't feeling those stomach pains from watching him wrestle, I'd fall asleep because his matches are so predictable. He gets some offense early, starts to get in trouble, the face starts to make their comeback, the Singh brothers run distraction, and his shitty cobra clutch slam gets the pin after about ten minutes. It's how each match played out. The best part of his entire reign was when Orton nearly killed the Singh brothers throwing them onto tables.
When Roman has a match, it feels like a big deal. No one on the roster, save maybe Cena, has that aura. Each match Roman is in feels like a big fight. They are usually fairly entertaining as well. That alone makes him better than Jinder.
THTRobtaylor
Once & Future Wrestlezone Columnist
Jinder DID do something important though... he reset the concept of anyone on the roster being just two wins away from the World title... for years the title pictures were so boring and predictable and it seemed that lower tier talent were well out of the mix. Now, like Jinder or not, even a lower tier guy can get an upset contender match win and take the title and it not look out of place or dumb. Like it or not, it also had a business logic to it, which many don't like to accept when it comes to who gets pushed. However India pans out, WWE IS bigger there now because they made this move.
The reign itself probably was marginally better than Chris Jericho's first, in that he clearly had more of "the machine" behind him and didn't have Triple H manuvering against him backstage... but was nowhere near as good as JBL's reign, who was the last guy to really get "this" push.
Reigns suffered from being forced down the fans throats, and unlike Cena when he was he didn't have the "likeability" that allowed people to just accept it. As far back as Cena winning his first title, some hated the idea... but they did the debut with Jericho on the Highlight Reel and many got behind it, had they realised that 13 years later he's in danger of breaking Flair's record they'd have been horrified...
Reigns doesn't have that, people simply HATE him with the belt, they might hate Jinder, but it's his job to be hated. Reigns can't get people to accept him and Vince can't force that, however many times he's tried. That they've had to bring The Shield back and give him the IC title sums up Reigns' future. He'll have to challenge Brock as IC champ.
If I really had to choose, on balance I go with Jinder... purely because he filled the brief. He got the company over in India, did a reasonable job as the heel champ and didn't (that we know about) screw up. Of course part of me suspects that Jinder dropping the strap was wellness related, and they're not saying so as not to damage the India tour (as it would be a massive scandal there) and if that came to be, I'd veer back to Reigns. But as it stands, Reigns failed, Jinder didn't.
Richard Blonoff
Make America Rassle Again
By what measure did Jinder get the company over in India?
I largely agree with your first point. It has been a long time since we got a truly out of left field title challenger, let alone one who actually won. Jinder's run does bring some of that unpredictability back. I also get that certain guys are going to be pushed for corporate reasons, and on the surface pushing someone of Indian heritage when you are trying to break into that market is fine. They are in the business of making money and putting on a good front after all, and India has a population north of a billion, so there is opportunity there.
That aside, there is no evidence to suggest that Jinder increased the WWE's popularity in India. I'm not going to touch on how TV ratings were down during his run, I'm focused only on his ability to bring in fans in the Indian market and by all accounts he didn't. Aside from the two or three Indian posters here who say that most fans would rather see the traditional stars as opposed to Jinder, there is the big red mark that WWE had to cancel the second night of the Indian Tour due to poor ticket sales. Yeah, his win got some coverage at first but by all reports there has been no spike in merch revenue or Network subscriptions. According to Forbes, their Network subs in the Indian market went up just .3% during his run, and merch sales went up 6%, which was only half the increase from same quarter last year. So I truly don't see how you or anyone can say his title run was a success.
Spencesc11
Getting Noticed By Management
Seriously???
Roman was built up as a Main Eventer over time. Mahal went from jobber to World Champ on Smackdown. This post doesn't make sense. Mahal could've made this a debate if he'd had a slow build but being portrayed weak when he had a size advantage on every opponent. C'mon???
Roman was built up as a Main Eventer over time. Mahal went from jobber to World Champ on Smackdown. This post doesn't make sense. Mahal could've made this a debate if he'd had a slow build but being portrayed weak when he had a size advantage on every opponent. C'mon???
The thing with the fact that they had to cancelled the second show of the tour as really nothing to do with Jinder, like it was reported i think from the wrestling observer, It's just the fact that the mentality isn'T like it is here as far as paying to go see show. They mostly don't pay to go see shows down there since most entertainment and sporting events are payed for by the country itself if i remember the report correctly so even if Jinder is a big deal in india and from some of the pictures and video's release from WWE and other sources, he seems to be pretty over down there, Their not going to pay to see a WWE event because it's not something that'S in them.
When they did the smae things with Tiger ali singh in the 90'S and Khali in the early 2000's and that was the same roadblock they faced, as over as these guys were to the indians fans, they couldn't get them to show up to their events because the fans had to pay and that'S not in their nature to pay to see a show.
Being an Indian, I never knew this. SPOILER. It isn't like this. Khali is still headlining sellout shows with his own promotion. So, stop saying as if people don't come out tp such shows. WWE has had sell out shows in the recent times. And this time, even the one show isn't sold out yet. Because rarely people care about Jinder Mahal. Just ask a random person here. He will know John Cena and even Roman Reigns. But Jinder Mahal? Who? That's the reaction. Jinder isn't a big deal in India. I've told you many times but you continue to state that he's damn big in India. And I know that you will continue. Because you just want to advocate Jinder's boring reign. And no, people don't go to shows paid by Government. Why would Government pay? People pay and watch. Do you seriously believe these things or just pick randomly whatever you want to?
Roman made me stop watching Wrestling for 2 years.
Jinder made me stop watching Smackdown for a few months.
Romans entire story was about Being pushed against all odds, with the WWE Audience booing the heck out of him, making his Underdog push with Corporate literally pushing him to the title completely unbearable. Seeing the Charisma vacuum week in and week out made me get bored of the product quicker than anyone since maybe The Miz's Title run. What was worse, They kept rehashing it too.
Jinder's title reign existing just to push into an Indian Market is a rehash of Khali, it fails so hard, when you see jobbers winning titles and the usual "Singh Brothers interfere, Yawn" every single month. None of Jinder's matches seemed any good... the Punjabi Prison being the worst match I've seen since Warrior vs Hogan HH '98. AJ got a good match out of Jinder, but he was pulling it all.
my vote has to go neither, they both had such lousy runs that hurt the titles, brands and company so much, in order to push Insane Vince's motives instead of the 2 options that work, Compelling story, or What the Fans want. Fans memeing Jinder to win was funny for about 5 minutes until it happened.
Jinder made me stop watching Smackdown for a few months.
Romans entire story was about Being pushed against all odds, with the WWE Audience booing the heck out of him, making his Underdog push with Corporate literally pushing him to the title completely unbearable. Seeing the Charisma vacuum week in and week out made me get bored of the product quicker than anyone since maybe The Miz's Title run. What was worse, They kept rehashing it too.
Jinder's title reign existing just to push into an Indian Market is a rehash of Khali, it fails so hard, when you see jobbers winning titles and the usual "Singh Brothers interfere, Yawn" every single month. None of Jinder's matches seemed any good... the Punjabi Prison being the worst match I've seen since Warrior vs Hogan HH '98. AJ got a good match out of Jinder, but he was pulling it all.
my vote has to go neither, they both had such lousy runs that hurt the titles, brands and company so much, in order to push Insane Vince's motives instead of the 2 options that work, Compelling story, or What the Fans want. Fans memeing Jinder to win was funny for about 5 minutes until it happened.
THTRobtaylor
Once & Future Wrestlezone Columnist
I've lived in India myself and people DO pay for shows... however, it would be wrong to say "they cancelled it so Jinder failed..." when the reality is WWE is struggling to fill arenas IN THE US! with it's talent. When the tickets are still relatively expensive for many Indian people, saying they "don't support the champ they were given" is wrong, many just have to make choices and while seeing WWE is a cool thing, it's not essential.
Where WWE DID do well is appeasing the Indian broadcasters, THAT was the purpose of Jinder, the tour was simply icing where they could make some money back. In signing a large TV deal, they had to make sure there was something for the Indian fan on their show, Jinder delivered that. It's no coincidence that the next TV deal to end is gonna be the Sky deal in the UK, and lo and behold, there's a UK division in the offing, more Brit talents than ever floating around and seemingly the top one who walked is now back in the fold...
TV deals are cash that WWE needs for its turnover and numbers, the last batch a few years back were well down...so the Indian deal helps claw some of that back. The next UK deal will be VERY difficult for them as Sky has lost a lot of viewers to the Network for its PPV's. There's less incentive than ever for them to keep WWE and with their recent restructure of channel's, not as clear cut a place for them. It's realistic RAW and Smackdown could be gone from Sky this time around as they will undoubtedly play hardball with Vince.
Where WWE DID do well is appeasing the Indian broadcasters, THAT was the purpose of Jinder, the tour was simply icing where they could make some money back. In signing a large TV deal, they had to make sure there was something for the Indian fan on their show, Jinder delivered that. It's no coincidence that the next TV deal to end is gonna be the Sky deal in the UK, and lo and behold, there's a UK division in the offing, more Brit talents than ever floating around and seemingly the top one who walked is now back in the fold...
TV deals are cash that WWE needs for its turnover and numbers, the last batch a few years back were well down...so the Indian deal helps claw some of that back. The next UK deal will be VERY difficult for them as Sky has lost a lot of viewers to the Network for its PPV's. There's less incentive than ever for them to keep WWE and with their recent restructure of channel's, not as clear cut a place for them. It's realistic RAW and Smackdown could be gone from Sky this time around as they will undoubtedly play hardball with Vince.
That N Word
Actively evolving
You can't even compare. Every match Roman had as champ were good/great. Facing off with the likes of Styles, Sheamus, Rollins. His rivalry was AJ Styles was arguably the best of last year, The Sheamus rivalry was the only good rivalry the company had at the time and was the only reason people were tuning in at that time, The 'THE Guy' catchphrase was catchy as well. Reigns' rivalry with Rollins was rushed (laregly due to the suspension.) However, the match delivered big time despite of which. I'm of the opinion of despite the short reigns, Reigns was an underrated champ.
Jinder Mahal improved a little bit and no longer feels like a joke, but I'd still consider him one of the worst WWE Champions of all-time, only beating Sheamus, Dean Ambrose, and Rey Mysterio in the modern era. His only anywhere near good match was with AJ Styles, a guy who it's literally impossible to have a bad match with, arguably the greatest in ring performer in the history of the business. Jinder's feuds have all been horrible, can't blame Orton because he actually tried to make it good odly enough. The Nakamura feud is probably the worst I've ever seen. His mic work has improved greatly I will say, but in the early stages it seemed as if he was whispering into the mic. I want to see Jinder make it, I really do. I was probably one of the only people who felt he deserved the title due to his hard work and dedication. Despite me not feeling him as a believable champion, I was still willing to see what he was capable and it failed miserably.
Jinder Mahal improved a little bit and no longer feels like a joke, but I'd still consider him one of the worst WWE Champions of all-time, only beating Sheamus, Dean Ambrose, and Rey Mysterio in the modern era. His only anywhere near good match was with AJ Styles, a guy who it's literally impossible to have a bad match with, arguably the greatest in ring performer in the history of the business. Jinder's feuds have all been horrible, can't blame Orton because he actually tried to make it good odly enough. The Nakamura feud is probably the worst I've ever seen. His mic work has improved greatly I will say, but in the early stages it seemed as if he was whispering into the mic. I want to see Jinder make it, I really do. I was probably one of the only people who felt he deserved the title due to his hard work and dedication. Despite me not feeling him as a believable champion, I was still willing to see what he was capable and it failed miserably.
BestSportsEntertainer
I Don't Need No User Title
Roman Reigns easily.
I mean I don't necessarily like the guy but he is a LOT more talented than Jinder.
His matches with Styles are better than anything Jinder did.
I mean I don't necessarily like the guy but he is a LOT more talented than Jinder.
His matches with Styles are better than anything Jinder did.
Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.
Kamehamehaaaaa!!
Roman was a good champ. He felt like one and acted like one, even if his acting was way too "I'm the cool boy here, hate me". I can't really compare them though, because Reigns only had like 1 feud with Styles before losing the belt to Rollins and the rest of his title runs (2) are way too small to even consider him a champion.
But for what it was, Reigns did his job. There's no denying to Roman's ability, he can be a top guy. But just a top guy. Not THE top guy.
But for what it was, Reigns did his job. There's no denying to Roman's ability, he can be a top guy. But just a top guy. Not THE top guy.
I voted neither. Jinder was a jobber before he was rushed to the title scene. Some say it was to get the Indian market more into the product, I have no idea, but he will appear on the Indian tour coming up so we'll see how it goes.
Reigns only as has already been stated had one feud with Styles. It wasn't much of a feud really either. When he won the US title he had a couple of matches with Rusev and then nothing of note. That seems to be the pattern with Reigns, give him the title and then he doesn't really do anything with it.
Let's see what he does with the IC title if it will be the same as before. Jinder on the other hand will probably not get the title back. Rumour is he's facing HHH in India, Styles isn't even on the tour.
Reigns only as has already been stated had one feud with Styles. It wasn't much of a feud really either. When he won the US title he had a couple of matches with Rusev and then nothing of note. That seems to be the pattern with Reigns, give him the title and then he doesn't really do anything with it.
Let's see what he does with the IC title if it will be the same as before. Jinder on the other hand will probably not get the title back. Rumour is he's facing HHH in India, Styles isn't even on the tour.
Stormjericho
New Member
Reigns for me.
While his promo work needs to be cut done (keep it short and to the point, no nonsense, and he's pretty descent), his in ring work is great considering his relative newness to the industry and keeps improving, and can be quite charming in real life (met him briefly when RAW was in NZ. Also, having met him does influence my opinion. I am shallow.).
I think the other thing that doesn't get mentioned enough, is Roman makes people feel legitimate. We all know he is the "Heir Apparent", so when people are competitive or beat him, it means something. Finn, Joe and especially Braun Strowman were all made to look like legit contenders (for Rollins with Finn, and Lesner for Joe and Braun) thanks to strong showings with Reigns. That might sound odd considering Finn and Joe's decorated backgrounds, but compare Joe's feud with Rollins and Finn's recent dance with Wyatt to see how "legit" they felt after battling Reigns. To be honest, I think only AJ and Cena are more legit at giving people the rub than Roman.
(BTW, I do think Jinder actually has talent, and can cut a great promo when given descent material, but his look and attitude don't work for someone who needs to steal victories thanks to his lackies.)
While his promo work needs to be cut done (keep it short and to the point, no nonsense, and he's pretty descent), his in ring work is great considering his relative newness to the industry and keeps improving, and can be quite charming in real life (met him briefly when RAW was in NZ. Also, having met him does influence my opinion. I am shallow.).
I think the other thing that doesn't get mentioned enough, is Roman makes people feel legitimate. We all know he is the "Heir Apparent", so when people are competitive or beat him, it means something. Finn, Joe and especially Braun Strowman were all made to look like legit contenders (for Rollins with Finn, and Lesner for Joe and Braun) thanks to strong showings with Reigns. That might sound odd considering Finn and Joe's decorated backgrounds, but compare Joe's feud with Rollins and Finn's recent dance with Wyatt to see how "legit" they felt after battling Reigns. To be honest, I think only AJ and Cena are more legit at giving people the rub than Roman.
(BTW, I do think Jinder actually has talent, and can cut a great promo when given descent material, but his look and attitude don't work for someone who needs to steal victories thanks to his lackies.)
MWRedskins
Mid-Card Championship Winner
this is Roman Reigns for me. While Jinder has better things to say on the mic and looks like he's in great shape, he's lousy with his delivery on the mic. Roman isnt great on the mic either, but he comes off and has came off as a guy who can intimidate his opponent. Jinder on the other hand just came to Smackdown after being in a losing tag team with Rusev, then was pushed to the moon.
What really made me choose Roman though is two things....1) i feel that if Roman were turned heel, he'd be much better in WWE. he seems like he can play the monster heel type of role.....2) Roman isnt Samoa Joe, AJ Styles in the ring, BUT i think the man actually can wrestle in the WWE. he has a move set and can do impressive moves. his finisher is too typical and been seen before, but i do like his moves. Jinder on the other hand, uses so many rest holds, does alot of punching and kicking with little great moves. his finisher isnt bad, but he's not the type of guy i could watch wrestle for a long time.
the only things i would give Jinder over Roman is his character (even though it's been seen before and despite his AWFUL delivery) and his music. i do like the song he comes out to.
What really made me choose Roman though is two things....1) i feel that if Roman were turned heel, he'd be much better in WWE. he seems like he can play the monster heel type of role.....2) Roman isnt Samoa Joe, AJ Styles in the ring, BUT i think the man actually can wrestle in the WWE. he has a move set and can do impressive moves. his finisher is too typical and been seen before, but i do like his moves. Jinder on the other hand, uses so many rest holds, does alot of punching and kicking with little great moves. his finisher isnt bad, but he's not the type of guy i could watch wrestle for a long time.
the only things i would give Jinder over Roman is his character (even though it's been seen before and despite his AWFUL delivery) and his music. i do like the song he comes out to.
Similar threads
