Overly Critical Man Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I don't know why Reigns doesn't just use the powerbomb since The Shield was so strongly associated with him doing it...unless he's unable to lift guys without the assistance of two other people or something. Like people aren't making enough comparisons between him and Kevin Nash. People are making comparisons between Roman Reigns and Kevin Nash? That's news to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggulator Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Yeah but I'm talking more Reigns' style vs those two. He doesn't even have a cool lifting move to hit Show with to get a pop with I'll get shit on for this but I really hate Sheamus,you guys You're not alone in Sheamus hate. He has decent matches. But he does all these things in-ring that are just so forced. His 10-punches to the chest thing is one of my least favorite spots. It's so unorganic and just feels like something someone came up with to get the crowd to have some sort of emotional investment in what he's doing. The Brogue Kick chant is the same thing. He's a truly terrible promo, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brysynner Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I don't know why Reigns doesn't just use the powerbomb since The Shield was so strongly associated with him doing it...unless he's unable to lift guys without the assistance of two other people or something. Like people aren't making enough comparisons between him and Kevin Nash. People are making comparisons between Roman Reigns and Kevin Nash? That's news to me. Is being compared to Nash a bad thing or a good thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJ Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Reigns was excellent in his role in the Shield. He was very protected and constantly showcased. You can't blame the WWE for seeing him as a future singles star. What you can blame them for is throwing him out there as a singles star without a parachute. How many televised singles matches did Reigns have before the breakup? I'm guessing less than five. That's not a coincidence. He was probably being protected because he still had to work on his skills. It's hard to believe that WWE didn't know that Reigns had little experience in long singles matches and would be exposed unless his skills improved. Due to this the chances of his first singles push failing was pretty high. But under Vince's logic regarding a wrestler (like Cesaro) he's not fully behind, the reason why Reigns didn't take off was because of Reigns. But under Vince's logic regarding a wrestler he is fully behind, Reigns is a young talent on his way to big things. He will continue to be showcased and talked about as if he's a big deal regardless of how the crowds are reacting to him. None of which helps anyone in the long run because Reigns is not ready and the longer he is exposed as not being ready the more difficult it will be to reinvent/repackage him down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overly Critical Man Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Regardless of all that, the crowds are pretty into Roman Reigns. Perhaps less than Dean Ambrose(I dunno, it seems like Ambrose has cooled off some), but Reigns is still over, even if people think he's had "weaknesses exposed" or whatever. Cesaro has always had trouble connecting with a crowd even if he was wowing people in the ring and even before they made the Heyman guy blunder. He was pretty well protected as US champ and still usually wrestled to silence(You can blame wrestling the Justin Gabriel and Zack Ryders of the world for that, but still). I dunno if it's because of poor writing, poor direction, having big nipples or what. Hopefully the podcast lights a fire under his ass and he shows that he does in fact have "it". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilwaldo Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Reigns also comes from a very successful wrestling bloodline which helps out a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overly Critical Man Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I'm pretty sure your look, hair, and physique is part of what constitutes having "it." It's something that's not easily defined, though. Goldberg had "it" and Ryback doesn't. Same with Andre and Big Show. Etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cristobal Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 "I've grabbed so many of Vincent K. McMahon's imaginary brass rings..." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJ Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I just don't see the argument that Cesaro has had difficulty connecting with crowds. If anything he is unusually gifted connecting with crowds. I can't think of any other wrestler on the roster who routinely comes out to a muted reaction and gets the crowd during the match. Cesaro v. Sheamus at Night of Champions is a perfect example of this phenomenon. Why does he get the muted entrance reaction? Why arent crowds looking forward to seeing a guy they end up lighting up for? If they gave Cesaro angles and promo time and he fell flat, you could blame Cesaro. But they really haven't give him very much. He delivers when wrestling and that's all they've given him to do. The other aspects all have to do with presentation. What his character is. What his motivations are. His relatability. How he's spoken about by the commentators. A wrestler has minimal control over these things. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I'm pretty sure your look, hair, and physique is part of what constitutes having "it." It's something that's not easily defined, though. Goldberg had "it" and Ryback doesn't. Same with Andre and Big Show. Etc etc. That's why it's so disingenuous. "It" means is that you fit into their preconceived notions of what a star looks like and should receive a push. So Luger had "it," right? Or is "it" one of those after-the-fact deals? Like they thought Luger had "it" but since he flopped, I guess it turned out he didn't. Interview Vince at the height of the Lex Express and he'd say that Luger had "it." Interview him after Luger shit the bed and he'd claim Luger never had "it." It's purely subjective and absolutely fake. Or now we can go back and pretend Daniel Bryan always had "it" because he got over. Or is Bryan not over, just his chant? And if we only understand "it" in hindsight, why even use it as a barometer? Christ, I have a headache now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overly Critical Man Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Whenever Lex Luger did the chicken dance, people went fucking nuclear. He totally had "it". On the other hand, Matt Morgan is a prime example of someone who never had "it" and never will despite someone like Jim Cornette swearing up and down he'd main event WM someday. And yeah, I agree that there's plenty examples of guys who don't have "it" and WWE will do everything in their power to force you to believe they do. HHH, for example. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyLaw Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. Reigns wasn't necessarily getting all of that when the Shield debuted. Ambrose was presented as the leader at first, but Reigns over time seemed to win the crowd over more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. Add in his heritage as well. It doesn't hurt to be related to The Rock and other former WWE guys and gals. I wouldn't call it grabbing the brass ring. I'd call it breaking through the paper ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Hunter's interview with Grantland was interesting. He'd be great on Austin's pod. I think they really should have this be a network thing. It can't be too costly and these interviews get people talking. It's extremely cheap and gives them something to do. Most of the wrestlers have nothing to do while they wait all day backstage for the show to begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromatagon Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. Add in his heritage as well. It doesn't hurt to be related to The Rock and other former WWE guys and gals. I wouldn't call it grabbing the brass ring. I'd call it breaking through the paper ceiling. That's why Rosie became such a huge superstar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technico Support Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. Reigns wasn't necessarily getting all of that when the Shield debuted. Ambrose was presented as the leader at first, but Reigns over time seemed to win the crowd over more. If what Punk said about the formation of The Shield is true, Reigns was the only non-negotiable member. From that you can gather that The Shield was always intended as the vehicle to get him over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Reigns was excellent in his role in the Shield. He was very protected and constantly showcased. You can't blame the WWE for seeing him as a future singles star. What you can blame them for is throwing him out there as a singles star without a parachute. How many televised singles matches did Reigns have before the breakup? I'm guessing less than five. That's not a coincidence. He was probably being protected because he still had to work on his skills. It's hard to believe that WWE didn't know that Reigns had little experience in long singles matches and would be exposed unless his skills improved. Due to this the chances of his first singles push failing was pretty high. But under Vince's logic regarding a wrestler (like Cesaro) he's not fully behind, the reason why Reigns didn't take off was because of Reigns. But under Vince's logic regarding a wrestler he is fully behind, Reigns is a young talent on his way to big things. He will continue to be showcased and talked about as if he's a big deal regardless of how the crowds are reacting to him. None of which helps anyone in the long run because Reigns is not ready and the longer he is exposed as not being ready the more difficult it will be to reinvent/repackage him down the line. Reigns had no more than 5 total singles matches before the breakup of the Shield in WWE and NXT combined. His first televised NXT match was awful too, so I don't think this should be a surprise. I know I wasn't surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 That's what I meant when I said they can make anybody a star. Reigns didn't "grab a brass ring" or have "it." Reigns was a guy they saw as a star due to his looks, hair and physique so they did their best to make him a star. He got the star push and the star booking. That's what's so maddening and phony about this "brass ring" talk. Put anyone in that same spot and -- let's do a conservative estimate -- I'd guess half would do just as well as him, probably more. Add in his heritage as well. It doesn't hurt to be related to The Rock and other former WWE guys and gals. I wouldn't call it grabbing the brass ring. I'd call it breaking through the paper ceiling. That's why Rosie became such a huge superstar Umaga main evented for being in the awful 3 Minute Warning team and having a bad debut...but hey, that doesn't count right? Where's my like Technico Support? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirSmUgly Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 It's really too bad that Christian can't go anymore. Reigns/Christian would be perfect for him. I do not enjoy Sheamus either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HumanChessgame Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I just don't see the argument that Cesaro has had difficulty connecting with crowds. If anything he is unusually gifted connecting with crowds. I can't think of any other wrestler on the roster who routinely comes out to a muted reaction and gets the crowd during the match. Cesaro v. Sheamus at Night of Champions is a perfect example of this phenomenon. Why does he get the muted entrance reaction? Why arent crowds looking forward to seeing a guy they end up lighting up for? If they gave Cesaro angles and promo time and he fell flat, you could blame Cesaro. But they really haven't give him very much. He delivers when wrestling and that's all they've given him to do. The other aspects all have to do with presentation. What his character is. What his motivations are. His relatability. How he's spoken about by the commentators. A wrestler has minimal control over these things. I agree with all of this. The promo time Cesaro has been given has been few and far between, and these spots have been bookended by heel/face turns and stints with three different managers and gimmick changes with little elaboration. If they'd give him a consistent gimmick plus some mic time to get it all over, then he definitely could. I thought he did great on that Raw episode from Montreal when he mocked the crowd for being faux-French as well as the pre-match promo he cut on Cena. Cheap heat in both situations, but he did a really good job with it. He was solid those few times he came out to do commentary too, although the sad state of affairs with the other broadcast team did next to nothing to help him. Reigns isn't bad by any means, he's just really green compared to a lot of his peers. He, Ambrose, and Rollins are all roughly the same age but the latter two have almost a decade on him as far as wrestling experience goes. That he needs to find a veteran who can work with him on house shows can't be said enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilwaldo Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Steph did an interview for Inc magazine. Here is a quote regarding connecting with an audience. “Developing your brand is different than marketing your brand. I think developing your brand, you have to know what you stand for, you know, what are your goals. What are you trying to achieve? Then you need to make sure you know your audience. Who are you trying to engage, what are you trying to get them to do and how are your reaching them. What are the relevant platforms, you know, are they on particular social platforms, are they watching television, what day parts? So know your audience, know how to communicate your messaging and know what you want them to do and then activate. You have to activate and you have to have a brand that’s worthwhile. You need to make sure that you’re delivering quality results.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromatagon Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 There's a joke about activating the Wonder Twin powers in there somewhere but I'm not gonna make it because I have standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJ Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Steph did an interview for Inc magazine. Here is a quote regarding connecting with an audience. “Developing your brand is different than marketing your brand. I think developing your brand, you have to know what you stand for, you know, what are your goals. What are you trying to achieve? Then you need to make sure you know your audience. Who are you trying to engage, what are you trying to get them to do and how are your reaching them. What are the relevant platforms, you know, are they on particular social platforms, are they watching television, what day parts? So know your audience, know how to communicate your messaging and know what you want them to do and then activate. You have to activate and you have to have a brand that’s worthwhile. You need to make sure that you’re delivering quality results.” What you stand for? Branding? Messaging? Getting your audience to do what you want them to do by activating them? This reads like it was lifted from a how-to pamphlet in political propaganda. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overly Critical Man Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Roman Reigns stands for "making it reign all up in the Roman empire, baby girl". Cesaro doesn't stand for anything. Roman 1 Cesaro 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts