At 2/27/18 06:05 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:
John Cena is still bad, and Reigns is hovering somewhere around that level.
I guess calling them 'bad' is pretty subjective. You LOVE Hulk Hogan, and from a technical standpoint, he was so much worse than either Cena or Reigns. He was certainly full of charisma, but I would say Cena has him beat on the mic any day.
To truly appreciate these guys, you have to understand the role they are meant to play. You have to have a sort of measuring stick with which all other talent can be measured. These guys do eat up main event slots, but when other talent goes over on them, they are elevated so much higher. Because of this, you have to book them on a lot of strong runs to keep that position believable.
This can definitely have huge downsides. Guys like Hogan, Kevin Nash and John Cena were notorious for letting ego supercede the elevation of new talent in many cases. Guys like Vader, Curt Henning, Booker T, Wade Barret and Rusev would have reached higher heights much sooner if these egos hadn't buried them at early points in their careers.
The thing is, I haven't heard anything that indicates Roman shares that same sort of ego. He's jobbed when asked, usually to give the fans the sense that WWE is listening to them and not using him to bury your favorite talent.
The character of Roman Reigns, for better or worse, is going to be the main guy that all other superstars are compared to going forward. And in spite his relative inexperience, he's actually grown into that role pretty well.
Take his recent matches with Braun Strowman for example. He, very easily, could have no-sold a lot of the feats of strength and brutality that Braun hit him with. Sure he's won a lot of their matches, but never in a way where you actually believed he was indestructible (compare this to Super Cena).
Braun doesn't have a ton of wrestling talent. His beleivability as a monster is a combination of his real physical strength, and his pairing with Roman over the past year or so. You may not like Roman, but you know he's considered the top/toughest guy on the roster right now. And so, when Braun manhandles him, you understand that WWE is portraying him as physically superior to Roman.
Then, take a look at the way he (and, to his credit, Cena) got Rollins over during the gauntlet match last week. Again, he could have shrugged Seth off over and over, making the roll-up finish look like nothing more than pure luck, but he made sure to demonstrate that while he was super tough and took everything Rollins had, he was feeling it, and was actually worn down enough to be beat with a crafty move.
Moving forward, it's not only a safe bet, but almost mandatory that he beats Lesnar at Mania. They built Lesnar up into too much of an unbeatable character. Only someone in Roman's position can beat him without things really looking TOO fake. Balor, for example, is an amazing competitor, but it would be a very hard sell to have him topple the beast.
Once Roman has the title, the whole landscape changes. We know for a fact guys like Seth Rollins, Samoa Joe and Finn Balor are capable of beating Roman clean. And guys like Miz can take him down via underhanded tactics. Roman having the title raises the odds of your favorite people actually getting a title push, and maybe a title run.
Sure, Roman will end up winning the title again and again, but that's the whole point of his position. And with so much amazing talent on the roster... once they get rid of the Lesnar problem, they are going to end up creating more top guys, like they did with the Rock and Jericho during the heyday of Stone Cold Steve Austin. We could be treated to another era where there's 4 or more consistent top level champions, vs the long haul of Cena being the only one of real consequence.