Raw LD 9/12/2016: There Are Worse Things To Watch

Everyone is in the same pond right now, Owens, Ambrose, Reigns, Wyatt, Rollins, Balor, Zayn. The truth is noone has yet broke the glass ceiling. Like Jim Ross said, nobody is yet over on the roster, except Cena and Lesnar.

Part of that has to do with the fact that all those listed above aren't ever allowed to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the Cenas and Lesnars of the world. Ntm, they are all made to look like chumps in front of the Authority on a regular basis.
 
The "one top guy" idea may be outdated anyway. The brand itself seems to sell more these days. Instead of having "The One", WWE should focus on building an ensemble cast of top talent.

That requires good storytelling all around which hardly happens on RAW nowadays. Tell good stories with various guys at different levels and the cream will rise to the top. WWE just doesn't seem to want to do that at all any longer.
 
Big E just needs a new finisher, and I think he might actually be the closest. His personality is a 10, his ring work is a 7 (and could go to an 8 or 9 with a new finish), and the fact that WWE could finally get out of the dark ages and push their all-black superstar as the #1 guy could be great for the company moving forward. I see a big future for Woods, too, but he will take longer to fully develop.

I'm waiting for the New Day to split up and then I can make a true judgement on Big E, specifically. No doubt he has shined as a part of a trios group, but like Roman Reigns and his two SHIELD bros before, will the situation prove different when alone?
 
Part of that has to do with the fact that all those listed above aren't ever allowed to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the Cenas and Lesnars of the world. Ntm, they are all made to look like chumps in front of the Authority on a regular basis.

Does it though?

For example, Reigns was given two Wrestlemania main events. Compare the popularity Reigns has with the popularity other people had after main eventing two Wrestlemanias in a row and you'll get my point.

However the real question here is, had it been anyone else, other than Reigns (given the unfortunate backlash from the fans), would they have gotten mainstream and over, like names such as Edge, Orton, HHH, Rock, Austin, Batista, Cena did after main eventing two Manias in a row?
 
That requires good storytelling all around which hardly happens on RAW nowadays. Tell good stories with various guys at different levels and the cream will rise to the top. WWE just doesn't seem to want to do that at all any longer.

That's true, unfortunately. They can't even build one guy right (Reigns), so no way they can Game of Thrones WWE. It'd be pretty cool if they did, though.
 
Part of that has to do with the fact that all those listed above aren't ever allowed to be mentioned in the same stratosphere as the Cenas and Lesnars of the world. Ntm, they are all made to look like chumps in front of the Authority on a regular basis.

I was thinking, maybe Kevin Owens can push through. He's got a fair amount of natural charisma and is over. He's Trips' guy, too. When they turn him face, they just might need that bottle to catch some lightning.
 
That requires good storytelling all around which hardly happens on RAW nowadays. Tell good stories with various guys at different levels and the cream will rise to the top. WWE just doesn't seem to want to do that at all any longer.

Plus, even if they had interesting storylines, it's not easy to tune in new people.

For example, I start watching a series, I know where I begin and then I can connect with the characters and the plot.

How does a new viewer get attached to the WWE stars and the plot, if they're not familiar?
 
I was thinking, maybe Kevin Owens can push through. He's got a fair amount of natural charisma and is over. He's Trips' guy, too. When they turn him face, they just might need that bottle to catch some lightning.

Hogan said that when he first saw Owens, he knew that this guy had something, he knew how to work a match, how to sell as a heel and he knew in ring physique. He then said that WWE can have a great face out of Owens.

I know that 98% of what Hogan says are just for attention or lies, but I think he meant that. If there's one guy who knows about being a top face and good heel work at the same time, it's Hulk Hogan.
 
Does it though?

For example, Reigns was given two Wrestlemania main events. Compare the popularity Reigns has with the popularity other people had after main eventing two Wrestlemanias in a row and you'll get my point.

However the real question here is, had it been anyone else, other than Reigns (given the unfortunate backlash from the fans), would they have gotten mainstream and over, like names such as Edge, Orton, HHH, Rock, Austin, Batista, Cena did after main eventing two Manias in a row?

Ye, Reigns was given two Main Events indeed, but ones where the booking of his character was damaged beyond repair both times such that he had zero chance of getting over as a babyface. Reigns is a poor example to use, lMO.


Compare that to Daniel Bryan who got pushed as a true underdog and went over Evolution as a whole with no-one batting an eyelid because the storytelling was so brilliant. Daniel Bryan got over big time and his injury and subsequent retirement clearly hurt WWE big time as he would have been the ideal poster boy whilst they bedded in the SHIELD trio(especially the Chosen One).
 
Hogan said that when he first saw Owens, he knew that this guy had something, he knew how to work a match, how to sell as a heel and he knew in ring physique. He then said that WWE can have a great face out of Owens.

I know that 98% of what Hogan says are just for attention or lies, but I think he meant that. If there's one guy who knows about being a top face and good heel work at the same time, it's Hulk Hogan.

Austin and Rock are also really high on him. Being top guys themselves, they know what it takes.
 
Ye, Reigns was given two Main Events indeed, but ones where the booking of his character was damaged beyond repair both times such that he had zero chance of getting over as a babyface. Reigns is a poor example to use, lMO.


Compare that to Daniel Bryan who got pushed as a true underdog and went over Evolution as a whole with no-one batting an eyelid because the storytelling was so brilliant. Daniel Bryan got over big time and his injury and subsequent retirement clearly hurt WWE big time as he would have been the ideal poster boy whilst they bedded in the SHIELD trio(especially the Chosen One).

That's why I set the second question ;)

Yeah, Bryan was the one who could have carried the company for 2-3 years until the next big star were to break out. Maybe that's why all those youngsters seem to be in the same pond. They have to get over by themselves, without a fresh main eventer Daniel Bryan backing them up while they move up the ladder.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,842
Messages
3,300,779
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top