Can we just agree that Roman Reigns is the best contender for being the next FOTC? - Page 7 - Wrestling Forum: WWE, AEW, New Japan, Indy Wrestling, Women of Wrestling Forums
 53Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of 63 (permalink) Old 07-11-2019, 05:57 PM
 
Ratedr4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,463
Points: 11,615
                     
Re: Can we just agree that Roman Reigns is the best contender for being the next FOTC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mongstyle View Post
Which options have they squandered? The only option there was Daniel Bryan who ended up retired in 2015. There haven't been any other options over the years, and certainly not during Reigns rise which began in 2015.

Even Rollins, who people liked to claim would be a better choice, has proven himself to be a flop twice now. Both in 2015 when they built the show around him and currently. And none of the other dudes in the past few years, be they Ambrose, Bray, Owens etc. have been better options.

No one on the current roster was a better choice than Reigns as the next FOTC. What hurt him was a combination of Bryan backlash and the decade of Cena push where fans have essentially become resistant to anything WWE may actively try to do. If anything, they should've transitioned to Reigns by 2016 and they could've avoided a lot of the problems they had, but the Cena factor would still exist and is a large reason why hardcore fans started hating on Reigns in the first place. You can't avoid that since it's a well WWE poisoned themselves.
Yes no one is currently better than Reigns as the FOTC, but that's because for at least a decade WWE has ruined all other talent or booked them with indifference so the audience lost interest in them.

Ziggler, Wyatt, Barrett, Rhodes, Ambrose, McIntyre, Nakamura, Zayn, Owens, Rusev, Balor, Ryback, Joe, Neville, Strowman, Roode.

Yeah not all of these people above could have been the FOTC, but they all should have been bigger stars next to Roman in the same way Austin/Rock had Taker, Mankind, Kane, HHH, Angle, etc.

WWE's talent pool is still pretty deep, but we keep seeing the same re-hashed matches every month.
RBrooks likes this.

https://www.wrestlingforum.com/signaturepics/sigpic183931_16.gif.pagespeed.ce.LTZKHskqwF.gif
Ratedr4life is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 63 (permalink) Old 07-11-2019, 10:33 PM
 
DoctorWhosawhatsit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: The Tardis, All of Time and Space
Posts: 11,575
Points: 36,599
                     
Re: Can we just agree that Roman Reigns is the best contender for being the next FOTC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzxz View Post
he aint next because he already failed
Good point.

How long can someone be pushed as the next fotc before they're objectively a failed fotc?

I'm pretty sure whatever length people come up with they'll all be under five years.

DoctorWhosawhatsit is offline  
post #63 of 63 (permalink) Old 07-11-2019, 11:58 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 210
Points: 624
                     
Re: Can we just agree that Roman Reigns is the best contender for being the next FOTC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratedr4life View Post
Yes no one is currently better than Reigns as the FOTC, but that's because for at least a decade WWE has ruined all other talent or booked them with indifference so the audience lost interest in them.

Ziggler, Wyatt, Barrett, Rhodes, Ambrose, McIntyre, Nakamura, Zayn, Owens, Rusev, Balor, Ryback, Joe, Neville, Strowman, Roode.

Yeah not all of these people above could have been the FOTC, but they all should have been bigger stars next to Roman in the same way Austin/Rock had Taker, Mankind, Kane, HHH, Angle, etc.

WWE's talent pool is still pretty deep, but we keep seeing the same re-hashed matches every month.
Literally none of the dudes you mentioned could have been the FOTC. And some of them, like Neville, Roode, Ryback, Rhodes, Barrett, Ziggler etc. definitely aren't upper card potential. They're mid-card at best.

And you're being disingenuous by pretending HHH or Angle were "big" stars during the Attitude Era. They weren't. The Attitude Era was near enough over when they started main eventing. Angle especially only came into his own around mid-2001 with the Invasion angle, post-Attitude and when both Austin/Rock were beginning to wind down. He was basically less of star than guys like Owens today back in 2000 where he was a comedy act for the most part. HHH only started becoming better around 2000 and his equivalent would be someone like Styles or Rollins today. These two were still far, far below Austin and Rock though. Same with Kane.

You're judging these dudes in hindsight while having the benefit of their entire career rather than actually looking at where they were during Austin and Rock's time on top. They were their bitches and mostly booked as such.

The only two guys you really have a case for are Mankind and Taker in terms of dudes feeling like stars, but even they weren't close to the levels of Austin or Rock. But they had tenure which gave them that added status at least.

Guys like Styles, Strowman, and Rollins have absolutely been booked well enough to be Reigns peers, but the problem is you have two world titles and so you have to build up two different main event cards. It doesn't help when WWE has clearly changed their booking pattern and tries to save all their big feuds for either Mania or Summerslam whereas back between 1998-2001, they were always booking big angles. The one time they actually booked against this in recent years was 2017, where they clearly did a good job of building up multiple guys like Strowman, Joe, Nakamura etc. But you still had people complaining then that they were "wasting" matches on B PPVs.
Mongstyle is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome