Roman Reigns - The next king of WWE?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Trip in the Head, Nov 6, 2014.

  1. I saw this on a Rumor Roundup post and it made me chuckle. Thought it would make for a good discussion on here. Obviously WWE is still planning to push this guy to the moon when he returns. Do you think he will live up to this title? Could he be the next John Cena? Have I posted this already somewhere? :heenan:

  2. Thanks, but no thanks!

    He's got some more developing to do, he's still a young gun. All that he is right now is good looks, limited personality and '5 Moves of Doom'. I'd like it if Roman wasn't Cena 2.0, but that's kinda WWE's fault. The guy's bloodline is no joke, he should live up to that, he's got potential to develop.

    With DBry out of the game indefinitely, and Rollins being the biggest heel, they should push the much much more talented Dean Ambrose!
  3. I think Reigns has a bright future. Do I think he's the next John Cena? No. I see him as a better version of Batista, as in he'll become a big star but never the #1 guy who has to carry the company on his back for the next five or six years or so. I expect Ambrose to surpass him and wouldn't be surprised to see Rollins do so as well.

    Regardless, I still think it's moronic for people to call him "SuperReigns", though. Other than winning a bunch of disposable Raw matches and beating Randy Orton at Summerslam, what has he done to deserve such an accusation? Daniel Bryan beat HHH, Cena, Orton, Batista and The Shield all in ONE YEAR and that's on top of winning 99.9% of his matches on Raw and Smackdown, and yet I don't hear the term "SuperBryan" being thrown around.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. :true:

    He has set a record or two though hasn't he? At least one for the most eliminations in a Royal Rumble match. I thought there was another but I forget. Maybe not. Those kind of records don't get broke that often anymore. But I still agree with your statement about DB.
  5. Yeah, the most eliminations in a Royal Rumble match. And something about the most eliminations in a Survivor Series elimination match. That's really not that much, though.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Oh hell yes.
  7. Roman has some developing to do, sure. And I agree that they've made him more like cena, in the sense that he does the "5 moves of doom" now. However, even though he has some development to work on, he's still very talented overall: Besides his mic work. the guy makes moves look like they hurt. He's a cross between precision and speed.

    I feel they should let him dive into more moves in the ring, then we'd see a better roman. He's got the potential to be the next face. Next cena? I'm not sold just yet.

    Also, the "5 moves of doom" argument is kind of silly. People feel that this makes Roma awful. When in reality, and this isn't discrediting Ambrose, this is more of an example, Ambrose does the same thing most of the time. He really only uses about 5 moves and then crashes into like 3 people with his body.

    He's just more talented on the mic and more entertaining with feuds than roman as of now... But in the ring, that's quesionable.
  8. I'm not sold on Reigns yet, like I've said before, he needs some developing to do. Not saying he's a useless dogshit, not at all, he's still inexperienced and we'll see what happens as the years go by.

    As far as Ambrose's in ring work goes, he's way better than Roman. Speaking of in ring work, Rollins is actually better than both of 'em. Personally, watching Ambrose vs Rollins is pure magic. As far as Reigns' matches go, so far Del Rio and Orton have been the only ones to bring out the best in Reigns, that tells ya something, the boy clearly has it. WWE just needs to capitalise on it.
  9. Pretty much every main eventer has their "5 Moves of Doom" - a set of specific signature moves that they use throughout a match, often executed in the late stages of the match when it comes time to set up their finisher. Ironically, the term became popularized in reference to Bret Hart, one of the greatest technical wrestlers of all-time.
  10. I don't think Reigns is ready for this.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. The Empire may need to do an overhaul in terms of how they present their product.
    When Lesnar took over after the Attitude Era ended, the way the product was presented had to change. Lesnar was Ruthless Aggression.
    Surrounding Lesnar, at that particular time, were talents who also personified Ruthless Aggression. It fit rather well.
    It seems Reigns skill set and personality is very different from everyone else on the roster. In some ways, he's far less talented than most of the roster,

    When its clear,the lower-tier talent runs circles around 'the guy', the fans generally turn 'the guy' heel.
    Roman Reigns is a unique talent. For some people, he's their 'taste'.
    I still believe Bray Wyatt is 'the guy'. Most disagree, but I'm standing by it. To me, he's more fan-friendly than Ambrose.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Agreed.

    To me, both Bray Wyatt and Ambrose scream 'anti-hero' persona.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Hopefully not
  14. My point exactly :) you said exactly what I was getting at.
  15. Tied with the SS eliminations with Aja Kong. (except Aja Kong is actually good)
  16. Reigns has some intensity in his matches, but he is not the right wrestler to sit on top of WWE. His biggest detriment is that his is not a good talker at all. Even when angry, his interviews don't inspire much. He pretty much talks on one emotion and it's not the right one.

    Another issue is that whenever a promotion picks a wrestler and grooms him to be the top guy, it doesn't follow through as much as it used to. When WWF was pushing Rocky Maivia, they failed. So they turned him heel and got him involved with the minor Nation of Domination feud. Once it was obvious they weren't sticking him down our throats, he grew on his own. the Ultimate Warrior was another that, although successful, was never really the top WWF guy for any real significant period of time. My impression in 2005 was that WWE thought Batista was going to be their guy and thus he beat Cena in the Rumble and into the main event. WWF tried to bury Austin several times and I am sure they never had any plans in the beginning to do anything monumental with him and same with Daniel Bryan.

    I have no doubt Reigns will have his share of main events, but any time as the top guy will be short lived. They would be much better getting behind Dean Ambrose who can talk, can wrestle and is all around very interesting to watch.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. True, but the "doom" reference is to Hulk Hogan's finisher "The Legdrop of Doom." Since he always ended his matches with it and for a significant period of time, Bret Hart did end most of his matches with those five moves: inverted atomic drop, Russian leg sweep, pendulum backbreaker, 2nd rope elbow drop and sharpshooter. Early in Hart's first WWF World Title run, nearly every one of his matches ended exactly this way. Fortunately he grew past it and although they showed up in a match, they rarely were as formulaic as that first run.

    I always looked at the moniker as an attack on WWF for trying to change Bret Hart to be as formulaic as Hogan was. I mean Hogan had his pattern of get his ass kicked, take a finisher, kick out, hulk up and shake his head, get punched in the face, get up and shake his body while walking in a curve, get hit in the face, shake his finger, punch, irish whip, big leg (or body slam), leg drop of doom, pin. Bret Hart, before his first WWF World Title win, wasn't a formulaic wrestler. But during that first reign, he became almost as formulaic as Hogan, which was likely the WWF's doing and a lot of us were pissed at how they were trying to sell him as they did Hogan, thus the term.

    But, fortunately, Bret Hart dropped the pattern of ending like that after the first title loss. The man was way too good to wrestle formulaic.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. the fat lass from Japan?

    Womens wrestling is shit lad. Only nerds like it
  19. Long time, no see. Where have you been lad?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. spunking over how great Orton has been lately
    • Like Like x 1