Why is there a need for a "Top Face" in WWE?

[ProWrestlingFan]

Nowadays John Cena is the top face on RAW and Sheamus is the top face on Smackdown who took the spot from Randy Orton.

Back in 2002 when Rock and Steve Austin left there was no top face on both Raw and Smackdown. Triple-H was the top heel on RAW whereas Brock Lesnar was the top heel on Smackdown. Then WWE made Cena the top face on RAW and Batista the top face on Smackdown but Batista got injured in 2006 then Edge became the top heel on Smackdown till 2010.

In my opinion when WWE didn't had a top face and the most dominating guy on the brand was a heel like HHH and Brock Lesnar it made faces look stronger whenever they defeated them.

But nowadays Cena and Sheamus are top faces which makes every heel look week in front of them.

In your opinion does WWE needs a top face or not ?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Why do movie studios court certain names to headline their $100 million dollar budgeted movies? Why did the Chicago Bulls do everything they could back in the day to make sure that Michael Jorday stayed put rather than head off down the road with another team? At the end of the day, every television show or sports team or studio head or whatever is looking for that special somebody that can be used as a draw. It's always been that way, it always will be that way.

Back when I was a kid, Hulk Hogan & Ric Flair were the two top draws in pro wrestling. They made the companies they worked for a lot of money and that's a big reason why both of them had title reigns that lasted years. WWE is always on the look for that "next big thing" because, at the end of the day, there's always going to be a few certain wrestlers that fans gravitate towards.

As for Cena and Sheamus making heels look weak, I don't think it's at all accurate to say that happens most of the time. Hells like David Otunga or Heath Slater look like scrubs against those guys because..well they kind of are scrubs in some ways. However wrestlers like Orton, Edge, CM Punk, Ziggler, Daniel Bryan, Big Show and lots of others have had their careers elevated by wrestling against the likes of Cena or Sheamus. It's hard to think of Sheamus making Daniel Bryan look weak in the grand scheme of things with Bryan taking Sheamus to the limit in multiple title matches in which he nearly won. I don't really see Cena making Big Show look weak when Cena needed the help of five other men to beat him during their last might.

I do agree that, sometimes, WWE does go too far when it comes to protecting their babyfaces.

 

[JaylisJayP]

It's that little thing called star power. It's what drives interest, sales and ratings. The reason why it's such a mess now is because WWE has gone way past overboard on the PG tendencies, and makes every one of their faces (Cena being the worst) an overly cartoonish PG bufoon. Cena, Punk and Sheamus are beyond awful now. Punk is the biggest sellout of them all. Yeah, I said it come flame me Punk marks.

At least Cena claims to just continue being himself. Punk does all this now because he's finally popular and doesn't evidently care that have him act like a total idiot all the time. He's awful.

 

[Captain Morgan Freeman]

Dude, are you high?

It's either that or having only watched wrestling for a grand total of 17 minutes that would warrant such a ridiculous notion, seeing as you have been a member since February im guessing the former.

Since wrestling has been popular it has needed "top faces" in order to survive. It's the super popular guys like the Hulk Hogan's, Cena's, Steve Austins and Rock's that make the product worth watching and sell the bulk of the murchandising and house show tickets.

It's funny you mention the HHH and Lesnar period as that was one of the worst times for WWE. The huge success from the attitude era was pissed away due to the fans having no one to cheer for. Ratings, PPV buys and attendances were down. It wasn't until they pushed emerging top faces Cena and batista that they stopped the rot.

At the end of the day the fans need someone to cheer for. The fans need to go away happy and that won't happen unless you have a "top face". It is possible to have "top faces" and dominant heels but there's simply a weak main event at the moment. That's the WWE's problem for not establishing top heels rather then the "top faces".
Put the joint down already.

 

[DDelaware2009]

I would say if you went back to the Triple H era of 2002-2003 where he was running roughshod over the roster as the main event, championship-carrying heel, there was ALOT of backlash from the IWC - pure vitriol and hatred. So not a great example FYI.

Lesnar had Angle, Edge had Cena and then Undertaker...there's always a top face. There has to be someone for the fans to cheer for.

 

[Skinsley]

It is not that there is a need for a TOP face in WWE. It just so happens that a certain guy at a certain time is the most popular person on the roster.

John Cena has been that guy, and almost unaposed for a long time. If someone else starts to get over and Cena's popularity flounders then they will become the top guy and Cena will be used less and less until it becomes apparent that he is no longer a marketable as he was before.

 

[FlairFan2003]

You always need a strong face ... he's the one guy who you absolutely believe when the money is on the line will beat the heel, which is what fans ultimatley pay for.

It is true that good heels can draw money. Certainly Ric Flair did. Austin's 1st championship at WrestleMania would not have been nearly as important if it didnt come from a really strong, well established villain in HBK. Triple H was a major force at the box office and in the ratings as a heel in the last decade. Randy Savage and Roddy Piper were great draws as bad guys.

Ultimatley those guys were so good at being bad you would cheer for almost anyone to beat them. They could actually elevate guys to main event status by working with them because you desparately wanted anyone to beat them.

Still the biggest money comes from having a strong, reliable, face, a hero, who the casual audience clearly believes can win, going against a mega heel. Dusty Rhodes ALWAYS drew against Flair, because he was the one guy with enough legitimacy on the roster that you believed could beat him. Cena did very well vs HHH & Edge because fans truly believed he could beat them.

A really good heel will bring in money even if he doesnt have a mega force of good opposing him. However, the big money, the Starrcade, WrestleMania, Great American Bash, SummerSlam money, the mega premiere event money, comes when there is a dominant believable villain, just skilled enough and evil enough to squeak out a win, going against a dominant, strong hero type face. HHH vs Booker T made for a good match, HHH vs Cena makes for a money match, pure and simple.

No doubt some guys are skilled enough to play both roles. Savage & Piper were, so was Flair. HHH always seems more comfortable as a heel, HBK was more entertaining as a heel, Kevin Nash could work both sides very well, Brett Hart was much better as a face, Ricky Steamboat never even tried being bad, Rick Rude was much better as a villain, so was Tully Blanchard. Still, the biggest matches almost always pit a dominating powerful hero against a strong, hard to beat, villain. Its just like in the movies, wether it's Spider Man, Mission Impossible, James Bond, BatMan, Harry Potter, we want to see the hero triumph and we pay big money to see them beat heavyweight bad @#$ villains.

 

[Mark Gallows]

Yes, you need a top babyface, you also need a top heel, that dynamic has worked since the year dot, the issue is Cena has been booked so, so badly for the past 8 years everyone over 12 is sick of him.

People are drawn to a face, psycologically, because they want to see good beat evil, they want to see the underdog finally realise his dreams and dethrone the bad guy, for this to work you need the face to be a sympathetic character (which they can't be if you win every, single, time) you cheer the face because they face adversity and keep coming, because they take a lickin' and keep on kickin', it's as simple as that old saying "people always cheer the underdog". By the same token, you need a strong heel that is a belivable threat to the plucky young babyface, when you create a gulf so great that no one is a threat to the face (super Cena) you've ruined the whole dynamic, you've removed any threat and made the heel/face confrontations meaningless.

Here's the better question, should WWE turn Cena heel? To steal a line from DB "yes! yes! yes!" you've now got an (almost) unbeatable heel for your babyfaces to run up against, and the heel/face dynamic starts working again. It happens to everyone, look at Hogan in '96, the fans were sick of the guy, he had become unbeatable, the gulf between top face and top heel had become too great, he turns Heel, becomes "Hollywood" and the buisness catches fire, not because of Hogan or the nWo themselves but because you now had a great new crop of faces to root for in Macho, Luger and Roddy Piper, they'd once again created conflict the fans could get invested in.

 

[flair4ever]

It isnt a issue of booking or anything, the reason why there is a top face is simple. thats the fans base now.

If u look at it since VKM took over and went national he has been following a pattern. In the 80's we had Hogan all american good guy and if you like almost everyone else was a hulkamaniac you watched religously and cheer for the face. And u were probibly 6-12 years old

then the attitude era, you were a teenager/ young adult. you had a anti hero. Stone Cold. only he wasnt your average face. He drank and cussed and flipped the bird every monday and you cheered him on. And at that time if we had good old hulkamania he would have been a tool and we wouldnt have watched wrestling.

Then when we hit or mid 20's early 30's we had HHH and Edge w/ lita Taker ( american badass) Now even tho those were suppost to be heels they were accual faces. How mant of us went nuts when edge and lita had the sex celebration on raw. Or loved DX

Now the fans of the 80's are adults. we have kids, so how does WWE/VKM keep us watching. make it a family show again. my son watches wrestling if not for him id probibly wouldnt watch as much. Cena is the new Hogan and the C-nation is the new hulkamaniacs.

Thats why now there r heavy faces on both shows. they arent trying to please the 18-35 year olds right now. they do that when they choose with a HitC or a brutal match. or Punk dropping a pipe bomb. they are reloading there fan base with the next generation of fans.

 

[Money_Inc.]

I think a top heel is more important... And then bring in a guy you want to push and have them try to overcome things... Kind of thinking of the whole Yokozuna and Lex Lugar showing up to defend all of us

 

[Trill Co$by]

It's that little thing called star power. It's what drives interest, sales and ratings. The reason why it's such a mess now is because WWE has gone way past overboard on the PG tendencies, and makes every one of their faces (Cena being the worst) an overly cartoonish PG bufoon. Cena, Punk and Sheamus are beyond awful now. Punk is the biggest sellout of them all. Yeah, I said it come flame me Punk marks.

At least Cena claims to just continue being himself. Punk does all this now because he's finally popular and doesn't evidently care that have him act like a total idiot all the time. He's awful.

What in the blue hell are you talking about? CM Punk hasn't sold out anything but arenas. What's so bad about Punk being the face he is? He still doesn't like authority, and he's still trying to make the WWE Championship interesting again... in fact, he IS making it interesting again. The whole time he's been in the WWE title picture, there's been interesting matches that go with that title.

Let me guess, because he's a face and he's not doing his old ROH promos or is trying to be safe and stay relevant rather than letting the business pass him by, he's become a sell out right? Or maybe it's because he's actually becoming a success in wrestling, and you think he instantly translates to a sell out because of that. You and the people like you who hate someone just because the WWE gave you and those people what YOU wanted amaze me. You're never satisfied and always complain when something goes YOUR way. With less people like you, the entire world would be much better.