Thoughts on Shane Vs Taker?
It sounds interesting on paper, but I'm afraid to see what it will look like.
Do you REALLY believe its still just this simple?
No, it's much more nuanced than that, but it's a very accurate broad overview of the subject.
I think its a fanbase rejecting something from a creative standpoint, just as they did with New Day when they first debuted. Once they got turned, and were utilized in an entertaining and more authentic fashion, they became immensely popular and great merch sellers.
I think you have to look into the various reasons WHY a fan base rejects something though. Additionally, you have to look at WHICH fan base is rejecting it and how. The New Day was rejected in a much different way than Reigns. The New Day was mostly met with indifference and by essentially the entire WWE fan population. They just weren't entertaining (in the beginning) and, most importantly, they would have been rejected no matter who was in their place.
It's different with Reigns. Reigns gets great face pops and a great amount of boos. People didn't care about New Day, they care about Reigns. And, if you were to replace Reigns with a smaller guy like Daniel Bryan or CM Punk, those who were booing wouldn't be. Why? Because it's "cool" to reject the idea of Vince McMahon's chosen one.
Those who boo claim it's because they don't like the booking or the "ramming down throat", but that's bull. When CM Punk was getting a year long reign, with Paul Heyman at his side, those people weren't booing. They didn't mind the unstoppable champion then. They mind with Reigns because Reigns is a big strong man, which must automatically mean a "Vince guy" which means to be "edgy", you have to boo.
Shit, even your example.....Punk wasn't over worth shit, then was allowed a large degree of authenticity and creative freedom, and bam, merch sales and a heated year long title reign.
Yes, where he won match after match, never lost clean, was given the primetime spotlight, etc...and was almost never booed by the same type of fans who boo Reigns weekly.
So what's the difference? Strong booking? Check. Main-event spotlight? Check. Constantly overcoming odds? Check. So what's the difference?
No one has ever proclaimed Reigns "couldn't wrestle"......They simply don't like him....and pretty much all of it has to do with a lack of authenticity and pre-fabricated path to the top.
Except that's not true. When the Shield first debuted, Ambrose was the golden boy of the group amongst the "smarks". Everyone loved Ambrose. When the Shield broke up, it was Rollins who received the big push. No matter which way you slice it, Reigns was not the first (or, at least, immediate) choice of the Internet fan or the WWE. But what happened was people were attracted Reigns. While he's a little green in the ring and leaves quite a bit to be desired on the mic, he had a certain charisma and authenticity which made fans pop. But once the WWE started to try and capitalize on this, that's when the "smart" wrestling fan turned on him because now he was "Vince's boy" or whatever.
I disagree very strongly that Reigns getting over was not authentic.
Are we not beyond simply scapegoating with the "guys have big muscles so people don't like them" thing? Big E is fucking huge
And no where near the main-event.
and is way over. See also, Brock Lesnar.
Attitude Era star. Different rules for those guys. Don't ask me why, but you know as well as I do there are. If I need to point out the example of those who called Cena a character for children while cheering for the Undertaker, I can easily do so.
What do they have in common? Authenticity (in their own way)
Reigns is no less authentic than someone like Punk.
And how about John Cena? Cena's a guy who started in UPW, worked the midcard for years, gained overwhelming popularity, and definitely had an "authentic" rise to the top...until about the summer of 2005, when all of a sudden "smarks" decided he shouldn't be cheered (coincidentally, or not, around the time he was working programs with Jericho and Angle). Was Cena somehow less authentic at New Years Revolution 2006 than he was at Wrestlemania 2005? Of course not. And even if one was of the opinion Cena hadn't earned it by 2006, surely now, after 10+ years of memorable feuds, matches and interviews, Cena has earned EVERYONE'S praise. But, still, people boo him and, interestingly enough, I feel quite confident the people who boo Cena are the ones who boo Reigns. Call it a hunch.
But let's not stop there. How about Seth Rollins? What was "authentic" about his ascension to the main event? He debuted in the Shield and the moment he turns on them, he's in the main-event and world champion. And many of those who boo Reigns are cheering Rollins, even when Rollins is facing Cena, whose rise to his position was certainly more authentic than Rollins. So why are the people who boo Reigns supporting Rollins?
Authenticity matters, but it's much more than that. Reigns time on top is no less authentic than Punks or Rollins, but they weren't shown the disdain Reigns is.
If what you DO say is true, and people simply boo them because they have big muscles
It's about muscles too, but I think it's more a case of rebelling against what those fans think is the type of guy Vince loves.
Then maybe the preferences of fans have evolved? Perhaps they would like to cheer for an underdog, or someone with whose struggles they feel they can relate to?
Neither of those are evolutionary for a fan. Fans have always loved those type of wrestlers, even back when Hulk Hogan ruled the world. No, the difference now is the need for so many fans to prove how "smart" they are to the business, and the best way to do that is by copping an attitude of "I'm not a mindless WWE drone, I'm going to be like all of my buddies and boo a guy because he's the type of guy I think Vince McMahon likes".
You've been around these forums a long time, you KNOW this is a prevalent attitude amongst Internet fans. You've been to shows, surely you've heard this mentality being uttered like I have. For these types of fans, it's not about pro wrestling, it's about feeling superior. They'll cheer the indy worker because he'll do a bunch of moves he saw in a training video and boo someone like Cena who has proven time and again his ability to put on great matches.
It's not necessarily about "big muscles", it's about the mentality of certain fans. But don't kid yourself into thinking the mentality of those fans isn't many times swayed by the muscular size of a wrestler.
